MARATTO

article · Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata

<i>Rhynchophorus phoenicis</i> production: A comparative study of different rearing protocols

Abstract

Abstract The traditional methods of sourcing and semi‐domesticating the African palm weevil Rhynchophorus phoenicis Fabricius (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) larvae persist among the inhabitants of Ghana. However, these methods produce only a small proportion of the market demand for the larvae in Ghana. A containerized system of producing larvae has been found to facilitate production for socioeconomic purposes, thereby enhancing the sustainable utilization of the larvae all year round. We evaluated the life history parameters of R. phoenicis on three different rearing protocols that used different agricultural by‐products, container types, and number of adult pairs for production. The different protocols were laid out using the Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with 10 replications. The fecundity of the adults differed significantly among the protocols. The highest fecundity was recorded on Protocol 2 (145.50 ± 16.55), followed by control (98.50 ± 12.05), Protocol 3 (84.50 ± 9.50), and Protocol 1 (45.00 ± 11.58). Protocol 2 recorded the highest larval survival rate, followed by Protocols 1, control, and 3. Among the rearing protocols, the highest intrinsic rate of natural increase ( r m) (days) and net reproductive rate ( Ro ) were observed in Protocol 2. The lowest mean generational time ( T ) was recorded on Protocol 2 (76 days) while the highest (92 days) was recorded on Protocol 3. Our findings showed that Protocol 2 supports fecundity, larval development, cocooning formation, and adult emergence. The adoption of Protocol 2 by smallholder insect farmers can contribute to the development of future commercial rearing systems for R. phoenicis larvae.

Research topics

  • Insect Utilization and Effects
  • Insect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
  • Animal and Plant Science Education

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.1111/eea.13571

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.