deliverable 3.2 report on performance evaluation of pro

DELIVERABLE3.2

ReportonperformanceevaluationofprototypeENTOMATICTrap

Page1/34

DELIVERABLE3.2

Reportonperformanceevaluationofpro-totypeENTOMATICTrap

ProjectAcronym ENTOMATIC

ProjectReference: 605073

ProjectTitle: Novel automatic and stand-alone integrated pest manage-menttoolforremotecountandbioacousticidentificationoftheOliveFly(Bactroceraoleae)inthefield

Deliverable3.2– ReportonperformanceevaluationofprototypeENTOMATICTrap

Revision: v7

Authors: FrankSpiller,Hans-UlrichMohr(IMMS)IlyasPotamitis,IraklisRigakis(TEIC)WardBryssinckx,MinaPetric(AVIA)AlbertBel,ToniAdame(UPF)

Receivedamendments/commentsfrom:NicolaosStavrakis(Phyto),GuyLaude(BIOSYS),MiguelChamoun(MTsystem),MehmetArifLaleli(KASIM),CarmenCapiscolPérez(INOLEO),EdaBiricik(AEGEAN),JoãoMira(AJAP),AntonioEstévez(NUT)

Projectco-fundedbytheEuropeanCommissionwithintheICTPolicySupportProgramme

DisseminationLevel

P Public X

C Confidential,formembersoftheconsortiumandtheCommissionServicesonly

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page2/34

RevisionHistory

Re-vi-sion

Date AuthorOrgani-zation

Description

1 12/12/2016 FrankSpiller IMMS Firstdraft

2 16/12/2016 Hans-UlrichMohr IMMS Amendments

3 19/12/2016 FrankSpiller IMMS Amendmentsofthepartners

4 27/02/2017AntonioEstevezAlcalde,AnaMaríaGarcíaPérez

NutescaAmendmentsaccordingtothecommentsoftheEC

5 28/03/2017 FrankSpiller IMMSAmendmentsaccordingtothecommentsoftheEC

6 30/03/2017 AlbertBel UPF FinalReview

7 27/8/2018 FrankSpiller/AlbertBel IMMS/UPFAmmendmentsaccordingre-viewcomments

Statementoforiginality:

This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise.Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been madethroughappropriatecitation,quotationorboth.

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page3/34

TableofContents

1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................8

2 Descriptionoftheperformanceevaluationofdifferenttrapsandwithdifferent

attractants.....................................................................................................................................10

2.1 Descriptionofthetests..........................................................................................................10

2.1.1 Test1:comparisonofstandardMcPhailandoptimizedMcPhailwithmulti-holeentrance.......................................................................................................................13

2.1.2 Test2:comparisonofstandardMcPhailwithoptimizedMcPhailwithmulti-holeentrance:..............................................................................................................14

2.1.3 Τest3:comparisonofstandardMcPhailwithoptimizedMcPhailwithmulti-holeentrancewithENTOMELA...................................................................................16

2.1.4 Test4:comparisonofstandardMcPhailwithELKOFONtrapwithENTOMELA..........17

2.2 Results....................................................................................................................................18

2.2.1 Differencesbetweenattractantsused........................................................................18

2.2.2 Differencesbetweenorchards....................................................................................19

2.2.3 Timedistributionofthecapturedfliesbystation.......................................................19

3 DescriptionoftheadvancedMcPhailTRAP..................................................................................22

4 Furtherdevelopmentsandevaluations.........................................................................................27

4.1 FinalconsiderationsaboutthefinalversionoftheENTOMATICtrap...................................27

4.1.1 Lowerpart-thereservoirfortheattractant...............................................................28

4.1.2 Electronicscase...........................................................................................................29

5 ExecutiveSummary.......................................................................................................................33

6 Literature.......................................................................................................................................34

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page4/34

ListofFigures

Figure1.1:McPhailtrap..........................................................................................................................................8

Figure2.1.LocationofthetestsinAndalucía,Spain.............................................................................................11

Figure2.2.Distributionofthefourtestsatthesixdifferentlocations.................................................................12

Figure2.3.Locationoftrapsinsidetheorchard...................................................................................................12

Figure2.4.Multi-holePlate(left)andmulti-holeplatebuiltintothetrap(right)................................................13

Figure2.5:Std.McPhail(left)vs.Opt.McPhail(right)..........................................................................................13

Figure2.6:Std.McPhailwithammoniumsulphate(left)vs.opt.McPhailwithABplasticring...........................15

Figure2.7:Std.McPhailwithammoniumsulphatevs.Opt.McPhailwithENTOMELA........................................16

Figure2.8:Std.McPhail(left)vs.ELKOFON(right)...............................................................................................17

Figure2.9:Comparisonoftheattractantsusedatthe4tests..............................................................................18

Figure2.10:B.oleaecaughtperorchardtested...................................................................................................19

Figure3.1:ComponentsoftheelectronicMcPhailtrapassembly........................................................................22

Figure3.2:ThenewPCBforoptoelectronicsensorsystem,topandbottomside...............................................23

Figure 3.3: Electronic case with WSN-PCB, battery holder, battery, antenna and sensor housing withenvironmentalsensors..............................................................................................................23

Figure3.4:Housingandbottomplateofenvironmentalsensors.........................................................................24

Figure3.5:Mechanicalpartsof25ENTOMATIC-McPhailtraps............................................................................25

Figure4.1:Increaseofvolumebyincreasingtheoutsidediameter.....................................................................28

Figure4.2:Increaseofvolumebyincreasingtheheightofthereservoirfortheattractant................................28

Figure4.3:SchemeoftheprototypeofcompleteMacPhailtrapwithelectronicbox(left)andproposalforfutureversion............................................................................................................................29

Figure4.4:Ventilationfromthebottomoftheelectronicscase..........................................................................29

Figure4.5:Ventilationviaventsatthecircumference.........................................................................................30

Figure4.6:Separatehousingforenvironmentalsensorsasinthecurrentprototype.........................................30

Figure4.7:SeparatehousingforenvironmentalsensorsmanufacturedinSLS-technology.................................30

Figure 4.8: Housing for environmental sensors and battery holder inside 3D-printer of IMMs (KeyenceAgilista3110W).........................................................................................................................32

Figure4.9:3D-printerofIMMS.............................................................................................................................32

Figure 4.10: Separate housing for environmental sensors and battery holder manufactured as rapidprototypingpartswithIMMS-3D-printerinPolyJet-technology..............................................32

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page5/34

Indexoftables

Table2.1:Countedflies(M-male,F-female)inTest1..........................................................................................14




Table2.5:Summaryofthetimedistributionofthecapturesperorchardtested................................................20

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page6/34

ListofAbbreviations

AB Ammoniumplasticdisc

AS Ammoniumsulphate

B.oleae Bactroceraoleae,OliveFly

BP Bi-ammoniquephosphate

CAD computer-aideddesign, is the computer and softwarebased creation,modifica-tion,analysisand/oroptimizationofadesign

FDM FusedDepositionModeling,arapidprototypingprocessfortherapidproductionofmodelsfromCADdata(3Dadditivemanufacturingtechnology)

OSS optoelectronicsensorsystem

PET Polyethylenterephthalat;athermoplasticmaterial,usede.g.formanufacturingofbottles

p.a. perannum,peryear

PCB printedcircuitboard

PolyJet PolyJet-Modeling,arapidprototypingprocessfortherapidproductionofmodelsfromCADdata(3d-printingtechnology)

SLS SelectiveLaserSintering,arapidprototypingprocessfortherapidproductionofmodelsfromCADdata(3Dadditivemanufacturingtechnology)

WSN wirelesssensornetwork

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page7/34

DefinitionofTerms

3G/4G/5G: 3rd, 4th, 5th generation ofmobile telecommunication standard (UMTS, LTE,

LTE-Advanced)

Bactroceraoleae OliveFly(B.oleae)

Muscadomestica housefly

PLEXIGLAS Poly(methylmethacrylate)(PMMA);transparentthermoplasticmaterial,oftenusedasanalternativetoglass;alsoknownasacrylicoracrylicglassandbythetradenamesPlexiglas,Acrylite,LuciteandPerspexandseveralothers

Vivak® tradenameofthermoplasticcopolyester(PETG/PET-G;Polyethylenetereph-thalate), common thermoplastic polymer resin, used in fibers for clothing,containers for liquids and foods, thermoforming for manufacturing, and incombinationwithglassfiberforengineeringresins

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page8/34

1 Introduction

ThisdeliverablepresentstheresultsofthefollowingactivitiesfortheENTOMATICtrap:

- performanceevaluation-comparisonbetweendifferenttrapsandwithdifferentattractants

- thedesignofthetrap-mechanicalcomponents

- themanufacturingofmechanicalandelectroniccomponents

- theassemblyofthefunctionalprototypesoftheENTOMATIC

- Newproposalsforthefutureproductionofthetrap

As described in Deliverable 3.1 the McPhailtrap, Figure 1.1, is the basis for the investiga-tionsinthisproject.Thistrapisthemostwide-spread in southern Europe, and most studieson the spread of the olive fly and the use ofpesticides have been performed in the pastwithit.

The McPhail trap is almost a standard andbasedonthestudieswith it theguidelines forfarmers were established. In order to allowcomparability of the results of the measure-mentsbetweenthetraditionalMcPhailandtheENTOMATIC trap, the trap shape was left al-mostunchanged.

Thefocusoftheactivitiesinworkpackage3isthe development of concepts for the ENTO-MATIC trap for the investigations and testsduring the project and a final concept for theutilization at the end of the project. The con-ceptsconsidertherequirementsacquiredinworkpackage1“Systemspecification”forthefollowingmaincomponents

- theoutershellandtheinsectpassagemodule

- theenclosuresforthebioacoustic-ID-system

- the enclosures for the embedded electronics (data acquisition and data processingmodules aswellasthecommunicationmodules)

- thepowersupply(batterypack,ifnecessaryasolarpanel).

Thefurtherdevelopmentof thetrapwasbasedontheexperienceof theSMEsandSME-AGsfromPortugal, Spain and Turkey participating in the consortium. In addition, a performance evaluation

Figure1.1:McPhailtrap

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page9/34

was carriedout comparing thevarious trapsandattractantsused in the southernEuropean coun-tries,chapter2.ThefollowingchapterspresenttheresultsofthefurtherdevelopmentofthemaincomponentsoftheENTOMATICtrapinthesecondyear:

- Chapter3:resultsoftheconceptualdesign,themechanicaldesignandthemanufacturingprocessofthecurrentprototypetrap.Thesetrapsarecurrentlyusedforlaboratoryandfieldtests.

- Chapter4:integrationofallcomponents,evaluationofthetrap,anddiscussionofsomeideasforfurtherdevelopments.

Inordertohaveanideaofthereal-timeoperationoftheelectronicENTOMATICtrapitispossibletoviewashortfilmonYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdWVaCyHEVI

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page10/34

2 Description of the performance evaluation of different traps and withdifferentattractants

Asapreconditionforthefurtherdevelopmentofthetrapsomepreliminaryinvestigationswerecar-riedoutbythepartnerNUTESCAin2015.Theseperformanceevaluationsincludethecomparisonofdifferenttrapsaswellasthecomparisonoftheeffectsofdifferentattractants.

Fourdifferenttestswerecarriedoutduring2015season.Themainobjectiveofthetestsperformedcanbesummarizedinthreepoints:

• capabilityofattractingB.oleaefliesofdifferentattractantsusedbyourconsortiumpartners

• differencesofattractingofdifferentstandardtrapsused/manufacturedbyourconsortium

partners

• benefitsofamulti-holeentrancetonotcaptureChrysopaflies

Inthenextsubsections,wewillpresentthedifferenttestsperformed,locationofthem,mainresultsachieved,andconclusionsthatwillbenefittheENTOMATICdesignofthetrap.

2.1 Descriptionofthetests

Asmentionedabove fourdifferent testswerecarriedoutduring2015season.The four testswerereplicatedin5differentoliveorchardsinAndalucia,aregioninthesouthofSpain.Thecontrolofthisregion is regulated by the Red de Alerta e Información Fitosanitaria(http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/agriculturaypesca/raif). This regional office depends on the localgovernmentofAndalucia.

The5orchardsselected, shown inFigure2.1,belong to thatcontrolnetworkofplaguesandhasavarietyofclimates(someofthemarelocatedinthehill,andothersinvalleys)thathasbeenhelpfultoobservedifferencesinthegrowandpropagationoftheolivefruitfly.

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page11/34

Figure2.1.LocationofthetestsinAndalucía,Spain.

Thedistributionof the tests follows thedistribution shown in Figure2.2.A total of 80 trapswereused divided in 6 field stations that are under supervision of the Junta de Andalucía. Themanualcountingofthemwasdoneevery5-7days.

LasEscuelas

LaVega

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page12/34

Figure2.2.Distributionofthefourtestsatthesixdifferentlocations.

ThetrapsweredistributedasshowninFigure2.3.Eachtrapwassettledevery5olivetreesandthecontroltrapsweresettled3olivetreesawayfromthetrapfromtheright.Bytrapwemeantoneofthe versions used, and for control trap the other, i.e., in the first experiment thatwe compare astandardMcPhail trapwithanENTOMATIC trap,wehave set theENTOMATICas the trapand thestandardMcPhailastheControltrap.

Figure2.3.Locationoftrapsinsidetheorchard

IBROS

Test 1- 4 traps

Test 2- 4 traps

Test 3- 4 traps

Test 4- 4 traps

LINARES

Test 1- 2 traps

Test 2- 2 traps

Test 3- 2 traps

Test 4- 2 traps

TORREBLASCOPEDRO

Test 1- 2 traps

Test 2- 2 traps

Test 3- 2 traps

Test 4- 2 traps

LAS ESCUELAS

Test 1- 4 traps

Test 2- 4 traps

Test 3- 4 traps

Test 4- 4 traps

JIMENA

Test 1- 4 traps

Test 2- 4 traps

Test 3- 4 traps

Test 4- 4 traps

LA VEGA

Test 1- 4 traps

Test 2- 4 traps

Test 3- 4 traps

Test 4- 4 traps

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page13/34

2.1.1 Test1:comparisonofstandardMcPhailandoptimizedMcPhailwithmulti-holeentrance

Oneproblemwithmanualcountingofthetrappedfliesisthelargenumberofcaughtinsects.Forthisreason,afirsttestwasusedtoinvestigatetheideaofchangingthetrapfunnelinsuchawaythatatleast large insects, likebeneficial insects suchasChrysopa,canno longer fly into the trap.For thispurpose,amulti-holeplatewasinsertedintotheentrance,seeFigure2.4.

Forthecomparison10traps,eachwithandwithoutamulti-holeplate,wereused(seeFigure2.5).ThetrapscontainedthesameattractantAmmoniumsulphate2%andtheyweresuspendedinpairs,withandwithoutamulti-holeplate,ontreesintheolivegrove.

Figure2.5:Std.McPhail(left)vs.Opt.McPhail(right)

Figure2.4.Multi-holePlate(left)andmulti-holeplatebuiltintothetrap(right)

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page14/34

Table2.1:Countedflies(M-male,F-female)inTest1

Date StandardMcPhail OptimizedMcPhail

Bactrocera Chrysopa Bactrocera Chrysopa

15/09/15 8M3F 219 10M7F 15

22/09/15 16M30F 249 17M15F 10

29/09/15 56M60F 368 108M85F 17

06/10/15 54M79F 197 54M72F 11

13/10/15 1M5F 24 8M11F 0

20/10/15 64M76F 34 47M42F 0

27/10/15 40M54F 100 56M30F 1

03/11/15 18M18F 114 35M21F 1

10/11/15 49M41F 84 33M34F 6

TOTAL306M371F 1389 368M317F 61

677 685

FromtheresultsshowninTable2.1weextractedtwomainconclusions:

• Bothsolutions,achieved,approximately,similarresultsintermsofcaughtflies.

• Thenumberofchrysopastrappedbythestandardtraparemuchhigherthantheoptimized

version.

Thisresultconfirmsthehypothesisthatwehadatthebeginningofthetests.Theuseofamultiholefunnelhaspreventedtheentranceofotherinsectsinsidethetrap,whilethenumberofB.oleaebe-comesthesame.

Thepreventionof theentranceofChrysopaswasagoodnew,as this insect isanaturalenemyofPraysandBactroceraoleaeandotherinsectsthatattackolivetrees.Hence,preventingthetrappingofchrysopasbecomesbeneficialtotheolivegrowers.

2.1.2 Test2:comparisonofstandardMcPhailwithoptimizedMcPhailwithmulti-holeentrance:

In thisoccasion,wecomparethesametrapsasbeforebutwithdifferentattractants: thestandardMcPhailwithAmmoniumsulphate2%andtheoptimizedversionwithanABplasticdiscandethyleneglycol/waterasdrawingliquid(seeFigure2.6).

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page15/34

Figure2.6:Std.McPhailwithammoniumsulphate(left)vs.opt.McPhailwithABplasticring

Themainconclusionontheresultsfromthetestshowninarethattheattractantusedintheopti-mizedversion(theABplasticring),hasattractedalowernumberofoliveflies.Hence,itseffectivitywaslowerthanAmmoniumphosphate.Thenumberofchrysopasarestilllowerwhenamultiholeisused.


Date Std. McPhail Opt. McPhail


15/09/15 6 M / 9 F 167 1 M / 4 F 1

22/09/15 10 M / 16 F 176 4 M / 3 F 1 29/09/15 49 M / 52 F 249 25 M / 17 F 2 06/10/15 44 M / 60 F 130 17 M / 22 F 1 13/10/15 3 M / 5 F 9 0 0 20/10/15 45 M / 56 F 33 7 M / 4 F 0 27/10/15 27 M / 23 F 31 5 M / 1 F 0 03/11/15 3 M / 2 F 59 1 M 0 10/11/15 30 M / 38 F 48 5 M 0

217 M / 261 F 902 65 M / 51 F 5

478 116

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page16/34

2.1.3 Τest3:comparisonofstandardMcPhailwithoptimizedMcPhailwithmulti-holeentrancewithENTOMELA

Thisthirdtest(seebothtrapsinFigure2.7)hashelpedustotesttheattractantcapacityofanotherliquidveryusedinGreeceandprovidedbyourpartnerPHYTOPHYL,theENTOMELA.

Figure2.7:Std.McPhailwithammoniumsulphatevs.Opt.McPhailwithENTOMELA

TheresultssummarizedinTable2.3shownagainabetterperformanceoftheAmmoniumsulphate2%usedinthestandardMcPhail.Thefirstattractantisabletoattractmoreoliveflies(byafactorof25).


Date Std. McPhail Opt McPhail


15/09/15 2 M / 5 F 255 2 F 3

22/09/15 4 M / 9 F 183 4 M / 4 F 25 29/09/15 44 M / 53 F 289 1 F 33 06/10/15 19 M / 28 F 198 1 M / 2 F 6 13/10/15 4 M / 9 F 30 0 0 20/10/15 36 M / 38 F 27 0 1 27/10/15 30 M / 25 F 57 0 0 03/11/15 10 M / 9 F 43 0 1 10/11/15 14 M / 18 F 44 0 0

163 M / 194 F 1126 5M / 9 F 69

357

14

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page17/34

2.1.4 Test4:comparisonofstandardMcPhailwithELKOFONtrapwithENTOMELA

Thelasttestwastocomparetwokindoftraps,showninFigure2.8,thestandardMcPhailwithAm-moniumSulphate2%(verypopular inthetestingregionofAndalucía)versustheELKOFONtrap(inthisoccasionequippedwithamultiholeentrance)withENTOMELA(verypopularinGreeceandpro-videdbyPHYTOPHYL).

Figure2.8:Std.McPhail(left)vs.ELKOFON(right)

Althought,inthisoccasiontheENTOMELAusedinanELKOFONtrapattractedmoreflies(88versus14ofprevioustest),thedifferencebetweentheAmmoniumsulphatewasalsohigh,moreconcretelythestandardMcphailhastrapped6timesmorethantheELKOFON.


Date Std. McPhail ELKOFON


15/09/15 2 F 181 3 M / 4 F 18

22/09/15 10 M / 13 F 155 9 F 8 29/09/15 57 M / 119 F 325 4 M / 7 F 28 06/10/15 11 M / 40 F 194 12 M / 20 F 14 13/10/15 1 M / 2 F 20 0 4 20/10/15 44 M / 81 F 25 7 M / 7 F 1 27/10/15 29 M / 26 F 91 1 M 0 03/11/15 22 M / 11 F 88 0 0 10/11/15 37 M / 30 F 40 10 M / 4 F 0

211 M / 324 F 1119 37 M / 51 F 73

545

88

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page18/34

2.2 Results

Inthissection,wewillsummarizetheresultsobtainedandwewillofferdifferentanalysisextractedfromthetestsperformed.

2.2.1 Differencesbetweenattractantsused

Figure2.9:Comparisonoftheattractantsusedatthe4tests

Asstatedbefore,thebestattratactantusedintermsoffliescaughtbythetrapstestedisAmmoniumsulphateat2%,thathasobtainedatotalnumberof685fliescaught.

685

116

14

88

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

AS EG ENT1 ENT2

Num

ber o

f Bractocera o

leae

Attractants used

Differences between attranctants

AS- Ammonium sulphateEG- Ethylene glycolENT1- Entomela (multihole)ENT2- Entomela (ELKOFON)

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page19/34

2.2.2 Differencesbetweenorchards

Jimenastation,Figure2.10,wasthefieldstationwherethehighestnumberofB.oleaewasdetected.Itisbecausethisstationislocatedinamountainarea,thatisthesuitablehabitatforthisinsect.Fur-thermore,thisstationisnottreatedwithchemicalproducts.

LinaresstationwasthefieldstationwherethelowestnumberofB.oleaewasdetected.Itisbecausethisstationhasalotofyoungolivetreeswithoutolives,sotheB.oleaepopulationislow.

2.2.3 Timedistributionofthecapturedfliesbystation

Theresultsofthetimedistributionofthefliescaughtbythetrapsinstalledatthedifferentlocationsissummarizedinthetablebelow(Table2.5).Init,weshowtheresultspereachtestedorcarhdandasummaryoftheobservedresults.

Figure2.10:B.oleaecaughtperorchardtested

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page20/34

Table2.5:Summaryofthetimedistributionofthecapturesperorchardtested

ThehighestnumberofflieswasdetectedattheendofOctober.It isbecausethetemperatureswere high and suitable for the fly. While thelowest number of flies was detected at themiddleofSeptember,whentheweathercondi-tionswerenotthesuitabletotheflyprolifera-tion

Inthisstation,thelowestnumberofflieswasde-tectedat themiddleofSeptember.However, thehighest numberof flywasdetected at thebegin-ningofNovember

Thehighestnumberof flieswasdetectedneartotheendofOctober.AndthelowestnumberofflywasdetectedatthemiddleofSeptemberliketherestofstations

We can see that the highest number of flieswasdetectedattheendofSeptember

3

810

24

1821

8582

67

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

15-set

17-set

19-set

21-set

23-set

25-set

27-set

29-set

1-oct

3-oct

5-oct

7-oct

9-oct

11-oct

13-oct

15-oct

17-oct

19-oct

21-oct

23-oct

25-oct

27-oct

29-oct

31-oct

2-nov

4-nov

6-nov

8-nov

10-nov

Num

ber o

f Bractocera o

leae

Dates

Distribution of B.oleae: Ibros station

2

5

7

1920

7

17

23

37

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

15-set

17-set

19-set

21-set

23-set

25-set

27-set

29-set

1-oct

3-oct

5-oct

7-oct

9-oct

11-oct

13-oct

15-oct

17-oct

19-oct

21-oct

23-oct

25-oct

27-oct

29-oct

31-oct

2-nov

4-nov

6-nov

8-nov

10-nov

Num

ber o

f Bractocera o

leae

Dates

Distribution of B.oleae: Linares station

1

7

6

7

3

11

5 5

2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

15-set

17-set

19-set

21-set

23-set

25-set

27-set

29-set

1-oct

3-oct

5-oct

7-oct

9-oct

11-oct

13-oct

15-oct

17-oct

19-oct

21-oct

23-oct

25-oct

27-oct

29-oct

31-oct

2-nov

4-nov

6-nov

8-nov

10-nov

Num

ber o

f Bractocera o

leae

Dates

Distribution of B.oleae: Torreblascopedro station

0

3

36

6

9

6

23

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

15-set

17-set

19-set

21-set

23-set

25-set

27-set

29-set

1-oct

3-oct

5-oct

7-oct

9-oct

11-oct

13-oct

15-oct

17-oct

19-oct

21-oct

23-oct

25-oct

27-oct

29-oct

31-oct

2-nov

4-nov

6-nov

8-nov

10-nov

Num

ber o

f Bractocera o

leae

Dates

Distribution of B.oleae: Las Escuelas station

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page21/34

In thisstation, thehighestnumberofflieswasdetected at the end of September, this is thesame in Las Escuelas station. It is because thetwo stations are near, so both have the sameweatherconditions

Becauseoftheweatherconditions,therewasnotpossibletotakeinformationabouttheflynumberduringtwodays.So,wehavelessinformationthantheother stations.However,we can see that thehighest numberof flieswasdetectednear to theendofOctober.ItisthesameinTorreblascopedrostation

OthertestscomparingMcPhailStandardtrapswithfirstversionsoftheelectronicMcPhailtrap(EN-TOMATICtrap)weremadebyTEICinlabandinthefield.Thesetestsaredescribedindeliverable2.2aspartoftheevaluationofthedesignedbioacusticsensortorecognizetheolivefruitfly.

Weobserve that in two field stations, thepresenceofB.oleae ishigherduringSeptember that inOctoberinNovember,whileintheothercases,itistheopposite.Thesedifferencesarebecausethelocationandcharacteristicsofeachfield,thusshowingtheimportancetoadaptthesamplingtoeachspecificorchard.

55

131

653

566

393

196

22

219

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

15-set

17-set

19-set

21-set

23-set

25-set

27-set

29-set

1-oct

3-oct

5-oct

7-oct

9-oct

11-oct

13-oct

15-oct

17-oct

19-oct

21-oct

23-oct

25-oct

27-oct

29-oct

31-oct

2-nov

4-nov

6-nov

8-nov

10-nov

Num

ber o

f Bractocera o

leae

Dates

Distribution of B.oleae: Jimena station

5

11

26

119

43

19

11

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

15-set

17-set

19-set

21-set

23-set

25-set

27-set

29-set

1-oct

3-oct

5-oct

7-oct

9-oct

11-oct

13-oct

15-oct

17-oct

19-oct

21-oct

23-oct

25-oct

27-oct

29-oct

31-oct

2-nov

4-nov

6-nov

8-nov

10-nov

Num

ber o

f Bractocera o

leae

Dates

Distribution of B.oleae: La Vega station

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page22/34

3 DescriptionoftheadvancedMcPhailTRAP1

Thetechnical requirements for thetrapsandthe firstvariantsof theoptoelectronicsensorsystem(OSS)weredescribedindeliverable3.1.Basedontherequirementsandthefurtherdevelopmentofthe optoelectronic sensor system (OSS) described at the deliverable 2.2, and the further develop-ment of the ENTOMATICWireless Sensor Network (WSN), described in deliverable 4.2, two newhousings/casesweredeveloped.

- Thefirstelectroniccase,installedontopofthetrap,Figure3.1,containsallthecontrolandpro-cessingelectronicsoftheopto-electronicsensorsystem,Figure3.2,theZolertiaRemotegatewayand thebatteries, Figure3.3. This case ismadeofwhitePlexiglas®XT toprotect theelectroniccomponentsagainstdirectsunlight.

- The second housing, Figure 3.4,mounted lateral at the first electronic case, contains the envi-ronmentalsensorsfortheWSN.Therearetemperature,humidityandluminancesensorsonthesmallPCB.Thesensorhousinghasbeenmanufacturedbyusing3D-printingtechnologywithDura-formProXmaterial. It isdesignedasaseparatehousing inordertobeabletodetectthemeas-ured data independently of the trap and allowing a better acquisition of these environmentalmagnitudes.

The design of the housings involved some challenges and constraints. The placement of OSS andWSNinsidethetrapisnotpossible,because:

1Thisinformationiscomplementingthefirstdesignedversióncoveredatdeliverable3.1.

Figure3.1:ComponentsoftheelectronicMcPhailtrapassembly

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page23/34

- Achangeintheinternallifeofthetrapwouldnothavepermittedacomparabilityoftheresultsofthemeasurements, thenumberof caughtolive flies,betweena standardMcPhail trapand theelectronicMcPhailtrap.

- Thetransparenttrapheatsupinthesunlight;thehightemperaturecandamagetheelectronics

Figure3.2:ThenewPCBforoptoelectronicsensorsystem,topandbottomside

Figure3.3:ElectroniccasewithWSN-PCB,batteryholder,battery,antennaandsensorhousingwithenvironmentalsensors

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page24/34

andthebatteries.

- A separate housing for the environ-mental sensors is necessary in orderto avoid the influence of the trap(hightemperatures)onthemeasuredvalues.

- The users require the ease of opera-bilityforthefieldtests,e.g.tochangethebatteries.

Concludingtheseandotherrequirementsforthetesttrap:

- The creation of an entity of trap andOESS as well as WSN as a rainproofhousingisnotpossible.

- The remote placement of the OESSandtheWSNonthetopofthetrapisa convenient solution for the testtraps.

- The separate housing for the envi-ronmentalsensors isanadequatesolutionusedinthousandsofmeteorologicalstationsallovertheworld.

Nowadaystrapshavealifetimeoftheattractantoftwoweeksduetotheevaporation.Therefore,afurther requirement isa larger reservoir thatwill containmoreattractantandallow increasing theautonomyofthetrap.ThesefurtherrequirementsoftheSMEsandSMEAGscanbeeasilyintegratedinthenextre-designaftertheupcomingfieldtests.

Thehousingwasdesignedusing a cylindrical tube, anupper andabottomplate aswell as lateralattachedsensorhousing.Somemoredetailedinformationaboutthehousings:

- Thehousingpartsarewhiteandabsorbvisiblelightupto56%,UVcompletely.

- Theupperandthebottomplateoftheelectroniccasewereproducedusinglasercuttingtechnol-ogyincludingthemanufacturingofgrooveanddrillholes.

- Electricalnon-conductivespacersweredesignedforreceivingtheOSS-PCBtopreventerrorcur-rent.

- Thegroovesofthespacersandtherecessesinthecircuitboardaredesignedinsuchawaythattheyallowaneasyassembly.

- Thesubassembliesbatteryholder,Zolertiaremoteundantennaaremountedatthecoverplateoftheelectroniccase.

Figure3.4:Housingandbottomplateofenvironmentalsensors

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page25/34

- Theantennaisfixedbyusingamoisturechamberfeedthrough.

- Thesensorhousingismountedonthesideoftheelectroniccase,betweenbothpartsaresiliconeO-ringsforsealing.

- Thesensorhousingislateralpartiallyopen,itisaweather-protectedstructurefortheinteriorlife,sothataircanflowthroughit;lightcanenter,butnorain.

- Thesensorcaseisclosedby4knurledscrews.Thescrewscanbeopenedbyhandwithouttools,sothatabatterychangecanbecarriedoutwithouttools.Forsealingpurposes,asiliconesealislocatedinagroove.

- Theopto-electronicsensorshangattwotubesinsidethetrap.ThecablesareguidedthroughthetubestotheOSS-PCB.

- TheelectroniccaseismadeofPlexiglas®XTandallthesensorhousingpartsandthebatteryhold-erweremadebyadditivemanufacturingfromDuraformProX.

- Thesuspension for theTrap isahexagonheadscrewwithadrilling.Thus, the trapcanbesus-pendedonatreeasaconventionaltrapusingawire.

Fortheupcomingfieldtests25trapswereproduced,Figure3.5,andshippedtopartnerTEIC.TEIChascompletedthetrapswiththeOSSandhasperformedafunctionaltest.Duringnextweeks,theconsortiumwill perform different lab and field tests of the electronicMcPhail trap developed byTEIC,IMMSandUPFtoverifytheperformanceofacompletenetworkoftraps.Moreover,itwillbetestthefunctionalityofthewebapplicationwiththedatacollectedbythedifferentinformationob-

Figure3.5:Mechanicalpartsof25ENTOMATIC-McPhailtraps

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page26/34

tainedfromthetestperformedbythewholeconsortium.

Theelectronic integration isbeingsupervisedbytheSMEMTSYSTEMSthatshouldevaluatethefu-tureviabilityof the finalelectronicsolutionof theENTOMATICtrap.Theirexperience in thedevel-opmentofelectronicPCBswillbeahelpfulsupporttoobtainafinalversionoftheprototype.

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page27/34

4 Furtherdevelopmentsandevaluations

ThetestsofthecompleteprototypesoftheENTOMATICtrap(thatwillbecoveredindeliverable8.8)willshowtheinteractionofthesubcomponentsunderrealambientconditions(fieldtests).Thetestsareperformedtofindpossiblesourcesofproblemsorerrorsandtoensurereliabilityandlifetimeoftrapofatleastfor7to10years.

Another point to be examinedwithin the investigations is the stability of the communication be-tweenthetrapsandthesufficientlongevityofthebatteriesoftheprototypetraps.

Theexecutionofthedifferenttestseriesallowsasophisticatedevaluationofthetrapeffectivenessandthederivationoftasksforfurtherdevelopmentaswellasacrosscomparisonwithconventionaltrapstomakesurethatthenewdesignisequallyeffectiveintrappingtheinsects.Thesetestsarethepreconditionfortheintegrationofallfunctionsfromallseparatedevelopedmodules.

The present design proposals for the shape of the trap for the later serial production have beenworkedoutinconsiderationofthemanufacturingprocessesdependingonthenumberofpiecestobeproduced.Newrequirements,suchastheexpansionofthecapacityofattractant,arealsoconsid-ered.

4.1 FinalconsiderationsaboutthefinalversionoftheENTOMATICtrap

ThefinalENTOMATICtrapwillconsistof3parts

- anewlowerpart-thereservoirfortheattractant-withanenlargedreservoirforattractants

- anupperpartwhichisredesignedregardingtheaccommodationoftheelectronicsboxand

- theelectronicsboxitself.

Therearethefollowingconsiderationsfortheproductionindifferentquantities:

- Rapidprototypingprocesses(3Dprinting)areusedforsmallquantities.Theyallowaveryflexibledesign of the housings and a fast production, but are very expensive compared to the othermethods.

- Averageunitnumberscanbeproducedonthebasisofsemi-finishedproducts.Theyarenotquiteasexpensiveas3Dprinting,buttimeconsumingandnotsoflexible.

- Plastic injectionmoldingprocessesareusedfortheproductionof largeseries.Forthispurpose,thepartstobeproducedmustbedesignedverysimply.Thepartsthemselvesareverycheapinhighquantitiesthen.

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page28/34

Ifweassumethat the trap isproduced invery largenumbers,plastic injectionmoldingwillbe themanufacturingprocesstobeused.Thenaseparateinjectionmoldingtoolisrequiredforeachofthe3housingparts.

4.1.1 Lowerpart-thereservoirfortheattractant

Theenlargementofthereservoircanbeachievedbyincreasingthediameterand/ortheheight.

With theenlargementof thediameter,asubstantialenlargementof theevaporation-effectivesur-facecanbeobserved.Becausethisalsoresults in increasedevaporation,anenlargementofthedi-ameterisnotadvisable,Figure4.1.

Theenlargementoftheoverallheightbyunchangeddiametersseemstobemoreappropriate.It isshownfor3differentvolumes,Figure4.2.Thesegeometricchangeshardlyaltertheappearanceofthetrap,sothisisunlikelytoaffectthebehavioroftheBactroceraoleae.

Figure4.1:Increaseofvolumebyincreasingtheoutsidediameter

Figure4.2:Increaseofvolumebyincreasingtheheightofthereservoirfortheattractant

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page29/34

4.1.2 Electronicscase

Theelectronicscaseofthecurrentlyusedprototypeisabox,whichismountedontopoftheupperpartoftheMcPhail.Itisplannedthattheelectronicscasewillbeproducedinlarge-scaleproductionasahoodsimilartothepresentshelloftheupperpartofMcPhail.Itisthenmounteddirectlyontothetrap.Duetotheintegrationofthevariouselectronicmodulesandthereductiontoonebattery,theheightoftheelectronichoodcanbecomemuchmorecompactcomparedtotheprototype.

Thenewelectronicscasehouses thenaPCB,abatteryand the integratedantenna.Thereare twopossibilities for the implementation of the environmental sensors. On the one hand, they can beintegrated directly into the electronic module, which thenmust be well-ventilated. On the otherhand,theycangetaseparatehousingasinthecurrentprototype.

For mounting of the electronics case onto thetraparevarioussolutionspossible:

- connect both assemblies by screwing, as atthecurrentprototype

- bayonet cap, comparable to the connectionof the top andbottomparts of theMcPhail

Figure4.3:SchemeoftheprototypeofcompleteMacPhailtrapwithelectronicbox(left)andpro-posalforfutureversion

Figure4.4:Ventilationfromthebottomoftheelectronicscase

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page30/34

trap

- screwingofbothhousingpartswithintegratedthreads

- Snap-inconnection.

4.1.2.1 Variants for the environmentalsensorarrangement

The environmental sensors shall be installed insuch away that theirmeasured values are notinfluencedbye.g.heataccumulation.

Variant1:Sensors integrated intotheelectron-icsboard

Variant1a:Ventilationfrombelow

Theelectronicscaseisdesignedinsuchawaythatconvectionispossibleviaslots.Theelectronicsisalsocirculatedbyambientair,Figure4.4.Thedisadvantageofthisvariantisthatdustcanalsocomeintocontactwiththeelectronics.

Variant1b:Ventilationfromtheside

Inthisvariant,slotsareformedinasimilarshapetothesensorhousingoftheprototype.Theyallowairtocirculatebutnowatergetsin,Figure4.5.Theelectronicsisalsocirculatedbyambientair.Thedisadvantageofthisvariantistoo,thatdustcancomein.

Variant2:Sensorsinseparateventilatedhousing,Figure4.6andFigure4.7.

Variant3:Hybridvariantofvariant1band2.

Figure4.7:SeparatehousingforenvironmentalsensorsmanufacturedinSLS-technology

Figure4.5:Ventilationviaventsatthecircum-ference

Figure4.6:Separatehousingforenvironmentalsensorsasinthecurrentproto-

type

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page31/34

Comparisonofvariants

Advantages Disadvantages

Variant 1a;Figure6-4

- 1simplehousingpart

- coolingofelectronicsbyconvection

- Less protection of the electronics frompenetratingofdustandmaybeinsects

Variant 1b;Figure6-5

- 1housingmorecomplicatedpart

- coolingofelectronicsbyconvection

- Less protection of the electronics frompenetratingofdustandmaybeinsects

Variant 2;Figure6-6

- Good protection when sealing be-tween upper part and sensor hous-ing

- 2injectionmoldsnecessary

- sealingnecessary

Variant3 - Inconspicuous shape thanks to inte-gratedsensorhousing

- Good protection when sealing be-tweenhoodandsensorhousing

- Complicated and expensive injectionmold

- Without protection between hood andsensorhousing,lowprotection

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page32/34

Figure4.10:SeparatehousingforenvironmentalsensorsandbatteryholdermanufacturedasrapidprototypingpartswithIMMS-3D-printerinPolyJet-technology

Figure4.9:3D-printerofIMMS

Figure4.8:Housingforenvironmentalsensorsandbatteryholderinside3D-printerofIMMs(KeyenceAgil-

ista3110W)

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page33/34

5 ExecutiveSummary

Theinvestigationshaveshownthatmanyfactorsaffectthenumberofcaughtflies,suchas:

- thetypeoftrap

- thetypeandconcentrationofattractant

- thedesignoftheentrance(withorwithoutmulti-holeplate)

- theweatherconditions

TheMcPhailtrapisalmostastandardandthefarmershavealotofexperiencewithit.Andthere-sultsoftheinvestigationsshow,thatthestandardMcPhailtrap(withoutmulti-holeplat)isbestsuit-edforfurtherdevelopmentastheB.oleaeisabletodiscernbetweenfliesandotherinsects(suchasthechrysopa).TheMcPhailtrapisawidespreadmethodoftrappingintheMediterraneanregionandhasahighacceptanceamong farmers, itssizecanbechangedeasilyand it is largeenoughfor theintegrationoftheENTOMATICsensorsystem.That’swhytheconsortium,basedontheexperienceofSMEsandSMEAGscriteria,decidedtouseMcPhailtrapasthebaseoftheENTOMATICtrap.

Theconsortiumdecidedonthisbasisthatthebasicdesignofthetrapremains.Thetrapisonlymodi-fiedinsuchawaythatthesensorsystemisplaceddirectlynexttotheentrance,abovethefunnel,andtheelectronicsandtheenvironmentalsensorsareaccommodated inseparatehousings.Thesefurtherdevelopmentsweredescribedinthisreport,chapter4.

Theresultingprototypeswillbeusedinfieldtestsin2017andindemonstrationactivitiesofthecon-sortium.Withthefieldtestsandindemonstrationactivitiestheevaluationsofthefurtherdevelopedtrapwill take place. The validation of thewhole systemwill be reported, as planned, at theWP8DemonstrationoftheENTOMATICsystem.

Inaddition,furtherconceptsforthefunctionalintegrationoftheelectroniccomponentswillbede-velopedandinvestigationsconcerningthedesignofthetrapforalow-costproductionwillbecarriedout.ThisshouldhelptheSMEsandSME-AGstostarttheproductdevelopmentdirectlyafterthere-searchprojectinordertoallowfortherapidimplementationoftheprojectresults.

DELIVERABLE3.2


Page34/34

6 Literature

[1] GeorgeC.Steyskal:HistoryandUseoftheMcPhailTrap.TheFloridaEntomologist;

Vol.60,No.1(Mar.,1977),pp.11-16;Publishedby:FloridaEntomologicalSociety;

DOI:10.2307/3494476;StableURL:http://www.jstor.org/stable/3494476

deliverable 3.2 report on performance evaluation of pro

Documents