jear2012 Abstract Oilseeds such as flax, canola, safflower, soybean and sunflower, which are annual plants, provide the world’s major source of vegetable oils, although the highest oil yield comes from oil-bearing tree fruits. One of the most popular oil seeds is safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.), which belongs to the Asteraceae family. Due to the ability of this plant to grow in dry and semi-dry conditions, safflower oil has the potential to be a commercially profitable product in Iran. Seasonal pop- ulations of safflower capsule flies were studied in Kohgiluyeh saf- flower farms, Iran, from March to May in 2008 and 2009. Four yellow sticky traps were used to monitor populations of fruit flies in the saf- flower farms. Traps were checked once a week during the sampling period. The traps were emptied weekly into insect collection vials con- taining 70% ethanol. Data were analysed with a two-way ANOVA. The relation between abiotic factors and species abundance was analysed with multiple linear regression. The results emphasized that Acanthiophilus helianthi was the most serious pest of safflower under the ecological conditions found in Gachsaran, being present in the field throughout three months of the year (March to May). Chaetorellia carthami was present in safflower fields from March to May, but in significant numbers only during April and May. Terellia luteola was present in safflower fields from March to May and in sig- nificant numbers only in late April, it does not seem to be a serious pest in safflower farms under Gachsaran’s ecological conditions. Introduction Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) is a member of the Compositae or Asteraceae family (Emongor, 2010). It is a multi-purpose oilseed crop grown mainly for its high quality edible oil, as well as for bird seed (Karimi, 2000). Initially, safflower oil was used as a source of oil in the manufacture of paint, but today it is widely used as edible oil for cook- ing, and in the production of margarine and salad oil (Tinay, 2001). Safflower is also grown for its flowers, which are used as; cut flowers, in colouring and food flavouring, for the manufacture of dyes for the textile industry, livestock forage, as vegetable, herbal teas and for medicinal purposes (Karegar et al., 2004). In China, safflower is grown as a medicinal plant for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases, male and female fertility, lowering blood cholesterol, as well as various types of rheumatism and respiratory diseases (Rennie et al., 2003). Safflower, is now cultivated on approximately one million hectares of land and annually about 700,000 tons of seed are produced (Zeynali, 2001). Iran, once known as Persia, used to be a centre for the commer- cial cultivation of safflower in the ancient world and it continues to cultivate this oil seed to this day (Golkar et al., 2010). At present, approximately 1000 hectares of land are under safflower cultivation in Iran, which produces approximately 700 tons of seed annually (Karegar et al., 2004). Due to the ability of the plant to thrive in arid and semi-arid lands, safflower has the potential to become a commer- cially profitable product in Iran (Karimi, 2000). Like other crops, safflower is susceptible to various diseases and insect attacks (Majidi et al., 2011). Due to water restrictions and the amount of arable land, one of the methods used to increase production is to reduce the damage caused by pests and plant diseases. In nature, insect populations fluctuate depending on environmental factors. Broadly speaking, these environmental factors can be divided into biotic factors, such as natural enemies and plants, and abiotic fac- tors, such as temperature, relative humidity and precipitation. From ecological studies, vital information can be obtained by monitoring changes in insect population numbers that result from changes in environmental factors. Studies of potential pests are necessary in order to meet the challenges of providing protection for both crops and livestock (Den & Walton, 1997). Fruit flies of the family Tephritidae (Order: Diptera) are one of the most serious pests of fruits and vegetables. They cause enormous eco- nomic losses in the production of fruits and vegetables throughout the world (Korneyev & Konovalov, 2010). In the Iranian province of Correspondence: Karim Saeidi, Department of Plant Protection, Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province, P.O. Box 351, Yasouj, Iran. Tel.: +98.741.3334821/+98.741.3334821 - Fax: +98.741.3334011. E-mail: saeidi391@yahoo.com Key words: Fruit flies; Acanthiophilus helianthi; Chaetorellia carthami; Terellia luteola; population fluctuation; Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad province. Received for publication: 1 September 2014. Revision received: 27 March 2015. Accepted for publication: 30 April 2015. ©Copyright K. Saeidi et al., 2015 Licensee PAGEPress, Italy Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; 47:4684 doi:10.4081/jear.2015.4684 This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (by-nc 3.0) which permits any noncom- mercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the orig- inal author(s) and source are credited. Population dynamics of safflower capsule flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Kohgiluyeh safflower farms of Iran K. Saeidi,1 S. Mirfakhraei,2 F. Mehrkhou2 1Department of Plant Protection, Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province, Yasouj; 2Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran [page 50] [Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; 47:4684] Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; volume 47:4684 No n- co mm er cia l relation between abiotic factors and species abundance was analysed No n- co mm er cia l relation between abiotic factors and species abundance was analysed with multiple linear regression. The results emphasized that No n- co mm er cia l with multiple linear regression. The results emphasized that was the most serious pest of safflower under No n- co mm er cia l was the most serious pest of safflower under the ecological conditions found in Gachsaran, being present in the No n- co mm er cia l the ecological conditions found in Gachsaran, being present in the field throughout three months of the year (March to May). No n- co mm er cia l field throughout three months of the year (March to May). was present in safflower fields from March to No n- co mm er cia l was present in safflower fields from March to May, but in significant numbers only during April and May. No n- co mm er cia l May, but in significant numbers only during April and May. manufacture of paint, but today it is widely used as edible oil for cook- No n- co mm er cia l manufacture of paint, but today it is widely used as edible oil for cook-ing, and in the production of margarine and salad oil (Tinay, 2001). No n- co mm er cia l ing, and in the production of margarine and salad oil (Tinay, 2001). Safflower is also grown for its flowers, which are used as; cut flowers, No n- co mm er cia l Safflower is also grown for its flowers, which are used as; cut flowers, in colouring and food flavouring, for the manufacture of dyes for the No n- co mm er cia l in colouring and food flavouring, for the manufacture of dyes for the No n- co mm er cia l textile industry, livestock forage, as vegetable, herbal teas and for No n- co mm er cia l textile industry, livestock forage, as vegetable, herbal teas and for medicinal purposes (Karegar No n- co mm er cia l medicinal purposes (Karegar No n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l Correspondence: Karim Saeidi, Department of Plant Protection, Agricultural No n- co mm er cia l Correspondence: Karim Saeidi, Department of Plant Protection, Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Kohgiluyeh va No n- co mm er cia l and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province, P.O. Box 351, Yasouj, Iran.No n- co mm er cia l Boyerahmad Province, P.O. Box 351, Yasouj, Iran. Tel.: +98.741.3334821/+98.741.3334821 - Fax: +98.741.3334011.No n- co mm er cia l Tel.: +98.741.3334821/+98.741.3334821 - Fax: +98.741.3334011. us e Carthamus tinctorius us e Carthamus tinctorius or Asteraceae family (Emongor, 2010). It is a multi-purpose oilseed us e or Asteraceae family (Emongor, 2010). It is a multi-purpose oilseedcrop grown mainly for its high quality edible oil, as well as for bird seed us e crop grown mainly for its high quality edible oil, as well as for bird seed (Karimi, 2000). Initially, safflower oil was used as a source of oil in theus e (Karimi, 2000). Initially, safflower oil was used as a source of oil in the manufacture of paint, but today it is widely used as edible oil for cook-us e manufacture of paint, but today it is widely used as edible oil for cook- on ly on ly Carthamus tinctoriuson ly Carthamus tinctorius or Asteraceae family (Emongor, 2010). It is a multi-purpose oilseed on ly or Asteraceae family (Emongor, 2010). It is a multi-purpose oilseed Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad, there are 18 known species of fruit flies, however, the species considered to be the most serious pests of fruits and vegetables number less than ten (Gilasian & Merz, 2008). The majority of these species are polyphagous, with high fecundity and the ability to spread quickly over a wide area, thus making them serious pests for the growers of fruits and vegetables. Effective management of this fly on safflower crops requires a better understanding of the species’ seasonal dynamics in a particular locali- ty. To achieve effective pest control measures, actions need to be tar- geted at periods of maximum population build-up and at the most vul- nerable stage of the crop (Saeidi, 2006). The present study was carried out to monitor population fluctuations of fly species associated with safflower damage in the Gachsaran region of Iran. Despite the fact that the threat of pest infestation is a serious prob- lem that hinders the cultivation of safflower on a commercial scale, no comprehensive or useful information about safflower pests in Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province and other parts of the country could be found. Materials and methods Study site Kohgiluyeh-va-Boyerahmad is a mountainous province situated in South West of Iran. About 3/4 of the area is rugged and plains comprise only 1/4 of the province area (Figure 1). The study was performed from March to May in 2008 and 2009 at the safflower farm in the Agricultural Research Station, Gachsaran. This site has a warm climate (mean min- imum temperature of 15°C and a mean maximum temperature of 46°C), and it is characterized by annual precipitation of about 250-300 mm. The total land area of the safflower farm surveyed covered an area of 0.5 ha. The site was selected because it represented a large area of cultivated safflower that is commonly infested by fruit flies. Fly trapping Four yellow sticky traps were used to monitor the populations of fruit flies in the safflower farm. The traps were composed of polyethylene plates with dimensions 20×20 cm produced by the Agro science British Company. The traps were installed at a height of 80 cm from the ground, 200 m away from the field edge and 800 m apart from each other. Traps were checked once a week during the sampling period. The sticky traps were completely cleaned after each survey and re-glued if necessary. Collection and identification of traps catches The traps were emptied weekly into insect collection vials containing 70% ethanol. The insects collected were sent to a laboratory for identi- fication and counting. Identification was based on the morphological characteristics of the collected specimens using a taxonomic key devel- oped by the Iranian Fruit Fly Initiative (Mohamadzade Namin et al., 2010). Samples of the identified insects have been deposited at the Department of Plant Protection, Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Yasouj, Iran. Incubation of flower heads Each week 50-safflower flower heads were collected and placed into plastic vessels. The mean room temperature during the incubation period was 23°C, while the relative humidity for the same period varied between 55% and 60%. The flower heads were inspected every other day to remove fruit flies pupae, until there no were pupae present in the flower heads. The pupae were then placed in plastic bottles (diam- eter 8 cm and height 15 cm) lined at the bottom with moist tissue paper for emergence. Emerged flies were collected by aspirator and then counted. Climatic data Data on temperature, precipitation and relative humidity of the study area were obtained from the local weather station at the Gachsaran Agricultural Research Station. Data analysis Data was subjected to two-way ANOVA. The correlation between abi- otic factors and species abundance was analyzed with SPSS multiple linear regression. Results and discussion Relationship of safflower capsule flies and abiotic factors A total of 7633 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps dur- ing both years, and consisted of 88.8% (6780) A. helianthi, 7.6% (585) C. carthami and 3.5% (268) T. luteola. In addition, 854 fruit flies emerged from the incubated flower heads of which 70.8% (605) were A. helianthi, 20.0% (171) C. carthami and 9.1% (78) T. luteola. A total of 3446 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps from March to May 2008. There was a significant difference among months in 2008 [degree of freedom (df)=2; F=3.59; P=0.041]. The highest [Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; 47:4684] [page 51] Article Figure 1. The geographical position of Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad province on map of Iran (Saeidi et al., 2015). No n- co mm er cia l 46°C), and it is characterized by annual precipitation of about 250-300 No n- co mm er cia l 46°C), and it is characterized by annual precipitation of about 250-300 mm. The total land area of the safflower farm surveyed covered an area No n- co mm er cia l mm. The total land area of the safflower farm surveyed covered an area of 0.5 ha. The site was selected because it represented a large area of No n- co mm er cia l of 0.5 ha. The site was selected because it represented a large area of Four yellow sticky traps were used to monitor the populations of fruit No n- co mm er cia l Four yellow sticky traps were used to monitor the populations of fruit flies in the safflower farm. The traps were composed of polyethylene No n- co mm er cia l flies in the safflower farm. The traps were composed of polyethylene plates with dimensions 20×20 cm produced by the Agro science British No n- co mm er cia l plates with dimensions 20×20 cm produced by the Agro science British Company. The traps were installed at a height of 80 cm from the No n- co mm er cia l Company. The traps were installed at a height of 80 cm from the ground, 200 m away from the field edge and 800 m apart from each No n- co mm er cia l ground, 200 m away from the field edge and 800 m apart from each other. Traps were checked once a week during the sampling period. The No n- co mm er cia l other. Traps were checked once a week during the sampling period. The sticky traps were completely cleaned after each survey and re-glued if No n- co mm er cia l sticky traps were completely cleaned after each survey and re-glued if Collection and identification of traps catchesN on -co mm er cia l Collection and identification of traps catchesN on -co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l u se 20.0% (171) us e 20.0% (171) A total of 3446 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps from us e A total of 3446 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps fromMarch to May 2008. There was a significant difference among months us e March to May 2008. There was a significant difference among months in 2008 [degree of freedom (df)=2; F=3.59; P=0.041]. The highestus e in 2008 [degree of freedom (df)=2; F=3.59; P=0.041]. The highest on lyA total of 7633 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps dur- on lyA total of 7633 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps dur-ing both years, and consisted of 88.8% (6780) on lying both years, and consisted of 88.8% (6780) and 3.5% (268) on lyand 3.5% (268) T. luteola on lyT. luteola emerged from the incubated flower heads of which 70.8% (605) were on ly emerged from the incubated flower heads of which 70.8% (605) were on ly 20.0% (171) on ly 20.0% (171) C. carthamion ly C. carthami A total of 3446 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps from on ly A total of 3446 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps from [page 52] [Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; 47:4684] number of individuals was obtained in May (Figure 2), and the number of flies captured of each species was also significantly different (df=2; F=133.72; P=0.000). The highest number of specimens came from A. helianthi (3780), followed by C. carthami (296) and T. luteola (111) (Figure 3). Acanthiophilus helianthi was the species with the highest number of individuals (P<0.05) emerging from incubated flower heads with 225 (63.2%) individuals, followed by C. carthami and T. luteola with 101 (28.3%) and 30 (8%) specimens, respectively (Table 1). Similar results were obtained in 2009. A total of 4187 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps from March to May 2009. There was a significant difference found in the various months in 2009 (df=2; F=6.46; P=0.005). The highest number of specimens was obtained in May (Figure 4), and the number of flies captured was also significantly different between species (df=2; F=133.72; P=0.000). The highest number of individuals belonged to A. helianthi (3000), followed by C. carthami (289) and T. luteola (157) (Figure 5). Acanthiophilus helianthi was still the most significant species (P<0.05) with the high- est number of individuals emerging from incubated flower heads at 380 (76.3%) individuals, followed by C. carthami and T. luteola with 70 (14%) and 48 (9.6%) specimens, respectively (Table 2). Examining damaged safflower’s flower heads across the semi-arid areas in Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province, in the south-west of Iran, it was observed that the safflower capsule fly and two other flies, namely Terellia luteola and Chaetorellia carthami, were infecting the flower heads of this crop. Overall, A. helianthi was the most abundant insect species. Figure 6 gives population dynamics of the different fruit fly species during the study period (2008). The number of flies per trap per week for A. helianthi was significantly higher (P<0.05) in the three months from March to May than those for C. carthami and T. luteola. Actually, there was no significant difference found between C. carthami and T. luteola numbers. The highest number of flies per trap per week for A. helianthi was recorded in mid-May, while the highest catch for C. carthami was recorded in early May. Whereas, the highest trap catch for T. luteola was recorded at the end of March and April. Table 2 shows the number of fruit fly species coming from incubat- ed flower heads during the study period (2009). The trapped numbers for the three fruit fly species were not significantly different (P<0.05). The mean number of A. helianthi captured during the study was significantly higher than those of C. carthami and T. luteola. A. helianthi was the most dominant (P<0.05) fruit fly species that emerged from the incubated fruits during the peak safflower months from March to May. Table 3 shows the correlations matrix for the three fruit fly species. The occurrence of A. helianthi was negatively correlated with that of C. carthami. The occurrence of A. helianthi was also negatively correlated with temperature, but positively correlated with relative humidity. However, populations of C. carthami were positively correlated with temperature, but negatively correlated with both relative humidity and rainfall. Populations of T. luteola did not show any significant correla- tions in these measures. Relationship of safflower capsule flies and abiotic factors (2009) A total of 4187 fruit flies were captured in the yellow sticky traps from March to May 2009. Out of these 90.2% (3780) were A. helianthi, 7.1% (296) C. carthami and 2.6% (111) T. luteola. In addition, 498 fruit flies emerged from the incubated flower heads of which 76.3% (380) were A. helianthi, 14% (70) C. carthami and 9.6% (48) T. luteola (Table 2). Figure 7 shows population dynamics of the different fruit fly species during the study period (2009). The number of flies per trap per week for A. helianthi was significantly higher (P�0.05) in the three months from March to May, than those for C. carthami and T. luteola. In fact, Article Figure 2. Number of safflower capsule flies found in different months 2008. Figure 3. Number of safflower capsule flies for each species in 2008. Figure 4. Number of safflower capsule flies in the months of 2009. Figure 5. Number of safflower capsule flies for each species in 2009. No n- co mm er cia l was recorded in early May. Whereas, the highest trap catch No n- co mm er cia l was recorded in early May. Whereas, the highest trap catch Table 2 shows the number of fruit fly species coming from incubat- No n- co mm er cia l Table 2 shows the number of fruit fly species coming from incubat- ed flower heads during the study period (2009). The trapped numbers No n- co mm er cia l ed flower heads during the study period (2009). The trapped numbers for the three fruit fly species were not significantly different No n- co mm er cia l for the three fruit fly species were not significantly different captured during the study No n- co mm er cia l captured during the study C. carthami No n- co mm er cia l C. carthami and No n- co mm er cia l and T. luteola No n- co mm er cia l T. luteola was the most dominant (P<0.05) fruit fly species that No n- co mm er cia l was the most dominant (P<0.05) fruit fly species that emerged from the incubated fruits during the peak safflower months No n- co mm er cia l emerged from the incubated fruits during the peak safflower months Table 3 shows the correlations matrix for the three fruit fly species. No n- co mm er cia l Table 3 shows the correlations matrix for the three fruit fly species. was negatively correlated with that of No n- co mm er cia l was negatively correlated with that of helianthiNo n- co mm er cia l helianthi was also negatively correlatedNo n- co mm er cia l was also negatively correlatedNo n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l Figure 3. Number of safflower capsule flies for each species in No n- co mm er cia l Figure 3. Number of safflower capsule flies for each species in No n- co mm er cia l 2008. No n- co mm er cia l 2008. us e o nly there was no significant difference found between C. carthami and T. luteola. The highest number of flies per trap per week for A. helianthi was recorded in late May, while the highest catch for C. carthami was recorded in early May. The highest trap number for T. luteola was recorded in the first week of April. Figure 8 shows the percentage of fruit fly species extracted from the incubated flower heads during the study period (2009). The trap catch numbers for the three fruit fly species were not significantly different (P<0.05). However, the mean number of A. helianthi captured during the study was significantly higher than those of C. carthami and T. lute- ola. A. helianthi was the most dominant (P<0.05) fruit fly species that emerged from the incubated fruits in the peak safflower season months from March to May. Table 4 shows the correlations matrix for the three fruit fly species. The occurrence of A. helianthi was negatively correlated with that of C. carthami. Furthermore, the occurrence of A. helianthi was also nega- tively correlated with temperature, but positively correlated with rela- tive humidity. In addition, populations of C. carthami were positively correlated with temperature, but negatively correlated with both rela- tive humidity and rainfall. Populations of T. luteola did not show any significant correlations with abiotic factors. The production of safflower in Asia is threatened by three major insect pests, namely; aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae), stem borers (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae). However, only the latter cause large-scale economic damage to the saf- flower flower heads (Kutuk and Ozgur, 2003). For example, yield losses due to fruit flies of more than 45% have been reported in West Asia (Khouzama et al., 2002) and between 28% to 85% in Iran (Keyhanian, 2008; Hasanshahi and Askarianzadeh, 2012). Studies on the species of fruit flies associated with safflower in the Gachsaran Agricultural Research Station showed that A. helianthi, C. carthami and T. luteola were the most important fruit fly species. The results from the present study demonstrated that A. helianthi was the dominant species from March to May. It was also the dominant fruit fly species that emerged from incubated safflower flower heads. The dominance of this fruit fly species coincided with the production of flower heads in both early and late maturing safflower varieties. This could be due to the absence of flower heads on the alternative host plants such as weeds. In addition, the study period represents the arid period at the Gachsaran station, which is conducive to the population growth of A. helianthi (Jakhmola and Yadav, 1980). As a consequence, A. helianthi causes an enormous amount of damage to safflower flower heads, resulting in complete seed loss if appropriate control measures are not taken (Merz, 2008; Gharajerdaghi et al., 2012). The results showed that the patterns of fruit fly population fluctua- tions in the safflower farm and during the study were similar (Figures 2 and 4). The population appeared in March, started increasing in April and reached its maximum in May of both years (2008 and 2009). Hasanshahi and Askarianzade (2012) reported similar results from the Tehran Province (Iran). They stated that the peak population of A. helianthi was observed in May. This peak period of safflower capsule fly population coincides with the ripening of the safflowers. Keyhanian (2008) reported different results from Ghom Province in Iran. He carried out an experiment to determine the seasonal abun- dance and loss assessment of the safflower capsule fly on safflowers. The results showed that the adults of A. helianthi appeared on the saf- flower crop between the 1st week of April up to 4th week of June, and an infestation of capsules by A. helianthi larvae was observed from the 1st of April to the end of June. Thereafter it declined, which was attributed to the maturity of the crop. Its maximum population in the 1st and 2nd [Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; 47:4684] [page 53] Article Table 1. Fruit fly species recovered from incubated safflower flower heads in 2008. Month Number of flower heads incubated Number of fruit fly species emerged Acanthiophilus helianthi Chaetorellia carthami Terellia luteola March 200 25 11 5 April 200 85 40 9 May 200 115 50 16 Table. 2 Fruit fly species recovered from incubated safflower flower heads in 2009. Month Number of flower heads incubated Number of fruit fly species emerged Acanthiophilus helianthi Chaetorellia carthami Terellia luteola March 200 90 10 5 April 200 120 20 12 May 200 170 40 31 Figure 6. Mean number of fruit flies per trap per week of the three fruit fly species from March to May 2008. No n- co mm er cia l were the most important fruit fly species. The No n- co mm er cia l were the most important fruit fly species. The was the No n- co mm er cia l was the dominant species from March to May. It was also the dominant fruit fly No n- co mm er cia l dominant species from March to May. It was also the dominant fruit fly species that emerged from incubated safflower flower heads. No n- co mm er cia l species that emerged from incubated safflower flower heads. The dominance of this fruit fly species coincided with the production No n- co mm er cia l The dominance of this fruit fly species coincided with the production of flower heads in both early and late maturing safflower varieties. This No n- co mm er cia l of flower heads in both early and late maturing safflower varieties. This could be due to the absence of flower heads on the alternative host No n- co mm er cia l could be due to the absence of flower heads on the alternative host plants such as weeds. In addition, the study period represents the arid No n- co mm er cia l plants such as weeds. In addition, the study period represents the arid No n- co mm er cia l period at the Gachsaran station, which is conducive to the population No n- co mm er cia l period at the Gachsaran station, which is conducive to the population (Jakhmola and Yadav, 1980). As a consequence, No n- co mm er cia l (Jakhmola and Yadav, 1980). As a consequence, causes an enormous amount of damage to safflower flower No n- co mm er cia l causes an enormous amount of damage to safflower flower No n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l u se on ly on ly on ly [page 54] [Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; 47:4684] generation was seen at the last week of May and the 1st week of June, respectively. One of the most important reasons for the different results obtained in Gachsaran and Ghom are due to the different climatic con- ditions and vegetation types present in these two areas. References DEN, D.R., WALTON M.P., 1997 - Methods in ecological and agricultural entomology. CAB International. - Wallingford, Oxon. EMONGOR V., 2010 - Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) the under- utilized and neglected crop: a review. - Asian J. Plant Sci. 9: 299-306. GHARAJEDAGHI Y.K., KHAGHANINIA S., FARSHBAF POUR ABAD R., 2012 - An investigation of the fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) fauna in Ajabshir region with the new record from Iran. - Mun. Ent. Zool. 7: 1. GILASIAN E., MERZ B., 2008 - The first report of three genera and fif- teen species of Tephritidae (Diptera) from Iran. - J. Entomol. Soc. Iran 27: 11-14. GOLKAR P., ARZANI A., REZAEI M., 2010 - Inheritance of flower colour and spinelessness in safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.). - J. Genetics. 89: 124-127. HASANSHAHI G.H., ASKARIANZADEH A., 2012 - Effect of drought stress on the damage safflower fly, Acanthophilus helianthi Rossi (Dip.: Tephritidae) on three cultivars of safflower, Carthamus tinctorius L. in Tehran region. - Iranian J. Entomol. Res. 4: 28-39. JAKHMOLA S.S., YADAV H.S., 1980 - Incidence of and losses caused by capsule fly, Acanthiophilus helianthi Rossi in different varieties of safflower. - Indian J. Entomol. 42: 48-53. KAREGAR A., ABDULAHI R., ARSLAN B., 2004 - Assessing of heritability and variance components of yield and some agronomic traits of dif- ferent safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.), cultivars. - Asian J. Plant Sci. 6: 554-557. Article Table 3. Correlation coefficients (r) between the occurrence of fruit flies and climatic parameters in 2008. A B C D E F Acanthiophilus helianthi (A) 1 Chaetorellia carthami (B) �0.442* 1 Terellia luteola (C) �0.365 �0.210 1 Precipitation (D) 0.292 0.345 0.128 1 Relative humidity (E) 0.678* �0.535* 0.008 0.731* 1 Temperature (F) �0.410* 0.176* 0.205 �0.556 0.660* 1 Numbers with asterisks are significant (P<0.05). Figure 7. Mean number of fruit flies per trap per week of the three fruit fly species from March to May 2009. Table 4. Correlation coefficients (r) between the occurrence of fruit flies and climatic parameters in 2009. A B C D E F Acanthiophilus helianthi (A) 1 Chaetorellia carthami (B) �0.453* 1 Terellia luteola (C) �0.389 �0.230 1 Precipitation (D) 0.299 0.369 0.136 1 Relative humidity (E) 0.692* �0.565* 0.009 0.767* 1 Temperature (F) �0.450* 0.182* 0.215 �0.585 0.689* 1 Numbers with asterisks are significant (P<0.05). Figure 8. Percentage of fruit fly species from incubated flower heads from March to May 2009. Means with different letters are significantly different at P<0.05. No n- co mm er cia l JAKHMOLA S.S., YADAV H.S., 1980 - Incidence of and losses caused by No n- co mm er cia l JAKHMOLA S.S., YADAV H.S., 1980 - Incidence of and losses caused bycapsule fly, No n- co mm er cia l capsule fly, safflower. - Indian J. Entomol. 42: 48-53. No n- co mm er cia l safflower. - Indian J. Entomol. 42: 48-53. KAREGAR A., ABDULAHI R., ARSLAN B., 2004 - Assessing of heritability No n- co mm er cia l KAREGAR A., ABDULAHI R., ARSLAN B., 2004 - Assessing of heritability and variance components of yield and some agronomic traits of dif- No n- co mm er cia l and variance components of yield and some agronomic traits of dif- ) between the occurrence of fruit flies and climatic parameters in 2008. No n- co mm er cia l ) between the occurrence of fruit flies and climatic parameters in 2008. No n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l A B C D E F No n- co mm er cia l A B C D E F 1 No n- co mm er cia l 1 No n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l No n- co mm er cia l heads from March to May 2009. Means with different letters are No n- co mm er cia l heads from March to May 2009. Means with different letters are No n- co mm er cia l u se HASANSHAHI G.H., ASKARIANZADEH A., 2012 - Effect of drought stress us e HASANSHAHI G.H., ASKARIANZADEH A., 2012 - Effect of drought stress on the damage safflower fly, us e on the damage safflower fly, Tephritidae) on three cultivars of safflower, us e Tephritidae) on three cultivars of safflower, L. in Tehran region. - Iranian J. Entomol. Res. 4: 28-39.us e L. in Tehran region. - Iranian J. Entomol. Res. 4: 28-39. JAKHMOLA S.S., YADAV H.S., 1980 - Incidence of and losses caused byus e JAKHMOLA S.S., YADAV H.S., 1980 - Incidence of and losses caused by Acanthiophilus helianthius e Acanthiophilus helianthi on ly teen species of Tephritidae (Diptera) from Iran. - J. Entomol. Soc. on ly teen species of Tephritidae (Diptera) from Iran. - J. Entomol. Soc. GOLKAR P., ARZANI A., REZAEI M., 2010 - Inheritance of flower colour on lyGOLKAR P., ARZANI A., REZAEI M., 2010 - Inheritance of flower colourand spinelessness in safflower ( on lyand spinelessness in safflower (Carthamus tinctorius on lyCarthamus tinctorius Genetics. 89: 124-127. on ly Genetics. 89: 124-127. HASANSHAHI G.H., ASKARIANZADEH A., 2012 - Effect of drought stresson ly HASANSHAHI G.H., ASKARIANZADEH A., 2012 - Effect of drought stress on the damage safflower fly, on ly on the damage safflower fly, KARIMI A., 2000 - Genetic variation in a safflower germplasm grown in rain fed cold dry lands. - J. Agron. 5: 50-52. KEYHANIAN A.K., 2008 - Seasonal abundance of the safflower fly, Acanthiophilus helianthi Rossi (Diptera: Tephritidae), an infesta- tion on safflower, Carthamus tinctorius L. in Ghom province, Iran. - Pajouhesh-va-Sazandegi 78: 57-62. KHOUZAMA M.K., KALASH S.M., WHITE I.M., 2002 - Flower head infest- ing fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) on thistles (Asteraceae). - Lebanon J. Nat. His. 36: 617-626. KORNEYEV S.V., KONOVALOV S.V., 2010 - Review of the fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) of Lugansk region (Ukraine). - Summery. 1: 35-38. KUTUK M., OZGUR A.F., 2003 - Faunistical and systematical studies on the genus Tephritis Latreille, 1804 (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the South West of Turkey along with new records. - Turk. Entomol. Derg 27: 243-252. MAJIDI M.M., TAVAKOLI V., MIRLOHI A., SABZALIAN, M.R., 2011 - Wild safflower species (Carthamus oxyacanthus Bieb.): A possible source of drought tolerance for arid environments. - Austr. J. Crop Sci. 5: 1055-1063. MERZ B., 2008 - Order Diptera, family Tephritidae. - Arthropod fauna of the UAE1: 643-661. MOHAMADZADE NAMIN S., NOZARI J., NAJARPOOR A., 2010 - The fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the fauna of Ardabil province, with new records for Iran. - Ukrainska Entomofaunistyka 1: 35-41. RENNIE K.L., HUGHES J., LANG R., 2003 - Nutritional management of rheumatoid arthritis: a review of the evidence. - J. Hum. Nutr. Dietetics. 16: 97-109. SAEIDI K., 2006 - Biology safflower fly, Acanthiophilus helianthi (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Gachsaran region. - Annual report office of Yasooj agricultural research center: 10-19. SAEIDI K., MIRFAKHRAEI S., MEHRKHOU F., VALIZADEGAN O., 2015 - Biodiversity of insects associated with safflower (Carthamus tinc- torius) crop in Gachsaran, Iran. - J. Entomol. Acarol. Res. 47: 26-30. TINAY A.H., 2001 - Changes in fatty acids composition during seed growth and physiochemical characteristics of oil extracted from four safflower cultivars. - Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 56: 385-395. ZEYNALI E., 2001 - Simulating GFDL Predicted climate change impact on rice cropping in Iran. - J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 3: 81-90. [Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research 2015; 47:4684] [page 55] Article No n- co mm er cia l u se on ly on rice cropping in Iran. - J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 3: 81-90. on ly on rice cropping in Iran. - J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 3: 81-90.