- Email: [email protected]
Growth of Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) and Sarcophaga dux (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) larvae in poultry and livestock manures: Implication for animal waste management
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jape
Growth of Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) and Sarcophaga dux (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) larvae in poultry and livestock manures: Implication for animal waste management
T
⁎
Hadura Abu Hasan , Kam Phun Leong Vector Control Research Unit, School of Biological Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Minden, Penang, Malaysia
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Growth Poultry Livestock Manures Musca domestica Sarcophaga dux
Natural diets commonly exploited by the flies are animal manures including production from the poultry and livestock facilities. The larvae of the common filth flies such as Musca domestica and Sarcophaga dux are known as voracious feeders and may thus be used to convert manures into non-polluted residue. This study was conducted to observe the impact on flies' growth rate and capability of the larvae to process animal manures using chicken, goat and cow manures. One hundred newly hatched larvae of M. domestica and S. dux were introduced separately into 150 g manures under laboratory conditions. The initial wet mass and larvae length were recorded while mortality rate and dry mass were measured after the larvae were placed into the manures. The results showed that the manure types give significant effects (p < .05) on the growth of M. domestica and S. dux larvae. Cow manures and chicken manures contributed the highest growth for M. domestica and S. dux respectively. This result confirmed by the mean increment in wet mass and larvae length. In contrast, M. domestica greatly reduced 59.9 ± 4% chicken manures while 25.0 ± 1.8% goat manures reduced by S. dux. The potential of M. domestica and S. dux larvae to reduce animal waste products were further discussed in this study.
Introduction The demand of poultry and livestock productions are increased as the human population increases. This directly leads to vast increases in production of manures from the poultry and livestock facilities. Recently, about 700,000 metrics tonnes of broiler waste are produced annually worldwide (Turnell et al., 2007) and it is expected to be continuing to expand in the near future. Increase in manures from poultry and livestock not only polluted the environment, but also increased the risk of spreading diseases. This situation usually attracted many insect vectors and other pathogens such as Escherichia coli that commonly found in animal manures (Williams et al., 2006). Different methods are used to cope with the increasing production of manures. In the past, the common method used was land application. However, it is proven to be source of nonpoint pollution for soluble phosphorus (Bekele et al., 2006) and the leaching of excess nitrogen and other elements, which may contaminate soil and water. Another method is composting which used to recycle solid waste (Turnell et al., 2007) or animal manures (Cekmecelioglu et al., 2005) which can be used as fertilizers. However, in this process, carbon is added to facilitate the oxidation process of the manures (Erickson et al., 2004) in order to
⁎
reduce the bulky materials of the manure and therefore increase the cost of composting. The other potential method recently used in composting is by using larvae of dipterous flies. The house fly, M. domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) is one of the vector of medical and veterinary importance that cause diseases and nuisance to human and animals (Förster et al., 2007) while S. dux (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) which is commonly known as a flesh fly is also a species of medical importance in many part of the world (Cherix et al., 2012). Although many of the fly species are considered as major pests, they are also used for biodegradation of organic waste and play an important role in the recycling of organic matter in nature (Čičková et al., 2015). The larvae of flies contained biologically active substance, such as antimicrobial peptides, lectin and chitin (Zhang et al., 2013) which will be benefit to reduce the manures and help in composting organic waste. This study was carried out to evaluate the effects of different manures on the growth rate of M. domestica and S. dux. Secondly, the efficiency of manures reduction were compared between two species of flies and finally the optimum growth in three types of manures of two species flies were also identified.
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Abu Hasan).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2018.07.001 Received 5 March 2018; Received in revised form 27 June 2018; Accepted 2 July 2018 Available online 03 July 2018 1226-8615/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Korean Society of Applied Entomology.
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong
Materials and methods
Percentage average larvae length increament Larvae length before − Larvae length after = × 100% Larvae length before
Manure samples The poultry manures were obtained from Animal Research and Service Centre (ARASC), Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) while the cow and goat manures were obtained from livestock farm at (5°15′00.4″N 100°29′31.0″E) Sungai Bakap, Seberang Perai, Penang, Malaysia.
Mortality rate =
Number of dead larvae × 100% 100
Percentage of manure reduction =
Rearing of M. domestica
150−remaining manure mass × 100% 150
Statistical analysis
The larvae of M. domestica were obtained from Vector Control Research Unit (VCRU), USM. The rearing method for M. domestica was modified from Hogsette (1992). Both of the species flies were reared at 30–33 °C and 59–66% relative humidity with a photoperiod of light and dark (9:15) in insectary at VCRU, USM. Adults of M. domestica were provided with constant access to 10% sucrose solution and milk powder in a Petri dish. Female house flies were allowed to oviposit into a mixture of 200 g mouse pellet and 200 ml water in a ratio of 1:1 in a plastic container (14 cm × 8.5 cm × 6.5 cm) inside the cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm). Crevices were made on the medium surface for female house flies to lay their eggs. This plastic container with eggs were then transferred to a new cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm), and the eggs hatched within 12 to 15 h. After four to five days, the larvae developed into pupae. Adult flies emerged five to six days after the formation of initial pupa.
All the data and results obtained were interpreted with univariate ANOVA, with subsequent Tukey HSD tests to determine the differences between the various treatments. Differences will be accepted as statistically significant when p < .05 by using Version 22.0 IBM SPSS Statistics analyser. Results Effects of three different types of manure on wet mass of M. domestica and S. dux For M. domestica, the greatest mean increment of wet mass ( ± standard error, S.E.) was recorded in cow manure (324.7 ± 43.6%). Mean increment of wet mass recorded in chicken manure and goat manure were 211.8 ± 43.9% and 280.3 ± 15.5% respectively. For S. dux, the most increment of wet mass was recorded in chicken manure (269.7 ± 15.7%) while the least mean increment was recorded in goat manure (81.2 ± 7.9%). The increment of wet mass of S. dux recorded in cow manure was 124.0 ± 22.0% (Table 1). The results showed that the mean increment of wet mass was significantly different (p < .05) for both species of flies developed in three different types of manure. However, analysis of Tukey test showed that the type of manures exhibit no significant different (p > .05) in mean increment of wet mass among the two species of flies (Table 1).
Rearing of S. dux The larvae of S. dux were sampled near student accommodation (5°21′25.0″N 100°17′34.9″E) in USM using raw fish as an attractant. The rearing methods were modified based on Firoozfar et al. (2011). The flesh flies were reared under similar conditions as house flies inside the insectary. Adults of S. dux were also provided with constant access to 10% sucrose solution and milk powder in a Petri dish. Adult flesh flies were allowed to mate, and female flies were allowed to oviposit into a medium of raw fish in a plastic container (14 cm × 8.5 cm × 6.5 cm) inside each cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm). This plastic container with eggs was then transferred to a new cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm) for development of larvae and pupae. The eggs hatched within 24 h and these newly hatched larvae fed on the raw fish. After four days, the larvae developed into pre-pupae stage. The pre-pupae stage developed into pupae within four to five days and the pupae remained for 10–14 days before finally emerged into adults.
Effects of three different types of manure on larvae length of M. domestica and S. dux The low increment of larvae length of M. domestica and S. dux were recorded in goat manure, which were 62.0 ± 13.2% and 47.1 ± 4.8% respectively. The increment of larvae length of M. domestica that reared in chicken manure was 190.2 ± 40.4% while the greater mean increment of larvae length was recorded in cow manure (231.9 ± 13.5%). In contrast, mean increment of larvae length of S. dux were only 29.5 ± 7.0% recorded in cow manure. In chicken manure, the mean increment of larvae length was 64.2 ± 6.8%, indicating that chicken manure was the greater medium for the growth of S. dux (Table 2.) The results indicated that the mean increment of larvae length were significantly different (p < .05) for both species of flies developed in three different manures.
The effect of different types of manure on M. domestica and S. dux larvae biomass One hundred newly hatched larvae were measured for wet mass and larval length before placed into chicken manure, cow manure and goat manure respectively for four days under controlled temperature and humidity in the insectary. All manures were weighed 150 g before the larvae were introduced. After four days, the larvae were removed and rinsed with tap water. The wet mass of each larvae were measured and the mortality rate was recorded. The length of the larvae were measured using a ruler with 0.1 mm scaling. The remaining manure were weighed and the percentages of reduction in weight were also calculated. The larvae were kept dry for three days at 50 °C and dry mass of each larvae were then measured. Five replicates were conducted for each manure and the larvae biomass were calculated as follows:
Table 1 Mean increment of wet mass of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure. Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) increment of wet mass (%)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
211.8 ± 43.9a 280.3 ± 15.5a 324.7 ± 43.6a 269.7 ± 15.7b 81.2 ± 7.9b 124.0 ± 22.0b
S. dux
Percentage average wet mass increament Wet mass before − Wet mass after = × 100% Wet mass before
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure). 881
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong
Table 2 Mean increment of larvae length of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure.
Table 4 Mean mortality rate of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure.
Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) increment of larvae length (%)
Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) mortality rate (%)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
190.2 ± 40.4a 62.0 ± 13.2a 231.9 ± 13.5b 64.2 ± 6.8c 47.1 ± 4.8c 29.5 ± 7.0d
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
0a 7.2 ± 1.7b 6.0 ± 0.6b 11.2 ± 1.5c 24 ± 1.7d 20.4 ± 0.8d
S. dux
S. dux
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure).
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure).
Effects of three different types of manure on dry mass of M. domestica and S. dux
Table 5 Mean manure reduction rate of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure.
In chicken manure, mean dry mass recorded for M. domestica was 0.04 ± 0.006 g whereas mean dry mass recorded for S. dux was 0.62 ± 0.013 g. In contrast, M. domestica resulted the highest mean dry mass in cow manure, which was 0.32 ± 0.010 g. In goat manure, this species only produced 0.23 ± 0.009 g of mean dry mass. On the other hand, S. dux caused the least mean dry mass in cow manure and followed by goat manure with 0.23 ± 0.011 g and 0.29 ± 0.013 g respectively (Table 3.). According to the Tukey test, the results demonstrated that the dry mass were significantly different (p < .05) for both species of flies developed in three different manures.
Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) manure reduction rate (%)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
59.9 ± 4.0a 7.0 ± 2.1b 32.2 ± 1.1c 23.0 ± 3.0d 25.0 ± 1.9e 13.7 ± 1.0f
S. dux
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure).
Discussion and conclusion Mortality rate
The results showed that different types of manure give significant effects (p < .05) on M. domestica and S. dux larvae. Among three types of manures, cow manure showed the highest growth rate on M. domestica, but S. dux significantly developed in chicken manure, supported by the evidence from the mean increment in wet mass and larvae length. M. domestica resulted the greatest mean dry mass in cow manure, while S. dux in chicken manure. Both M. domestica and S. dux have the highest percentage of mortality rate in goat manure. On the other hand, highest percentage of mean manure reduction by M. domestica occurred in chicken manure while for S. dux in goat manure. The efficient growth of M. domestica was supported by the greatest wet mass and larvae length (Tables 1 & 2). In contrast, previous study by Khan et al. (2012) demonstrated that the rate of development of M. domestica was faster in poultry manure compared to the other livestock manures. Other previous study by Larraín and Salas (2008) also revealed that development of M. domestica in cow manure was significantly lower compared to chicken manure although the moisture content recorded in those study were 78% and 65% in cow and chicken manures respectively. The moisture content which was not recorded in this current study is believed to permit the growth of M. domestica in cow manure. In contrast with the results obtained from the wet mass and larvae length, the mortality rate of M. domestica and S. dux larvae were relatively low in the treatment of chicken manure. By most of the criteria measured above, growth of M. domestica was less effective in goat manure compared to chicken and cow manures. Despite this species resulted a comparable weight of wet and dry mass, the increment in larvae length was the lowest in goat manure. Moreover, the mortality rate for both species of flies were greatly recorded in goat manure compared to chicken and cow manures (Table 4). The primary reason of the greater mortality of both species in goat manure might be the texture and its viscosity. Due to the nature of the manures, cow manure were more compact than goat manure, thus the leaching rate of nutrients and moisture were different, resulting in cow manure were softer and moister while goat manure were harder and drier. The well aerated and soft substrate were dominated by the larvae to prevent from suffocation. If the medium was hard to penetrate, the larvae were only
Both M. domestica and S. dux have the lowest mean mortality rate in chicken manure, which were 0% and 11.2 ± 1.5% respectively. Both M. domestica and S. dux have the highest mean mortality rate when reared in goat manure, which were 7.2 ± 1.7% and 24 ± 1.7% respectively. Cow manure caused mean mortality rate of 6.0 ± 0.6% and 20.4 ± 0.8% on M. domestica and S. dux respectively (Table 4.). The Tukey test showed that both species of flies have significantly lower mortality rate in chicken manure compared to goat and cow manures. Therefore, different types of manures give significant effects (p < .05) on mean mortality rate between both species of flies.
Manure reduction rate Mean manure reduction rate for M. domestica were 59.9 ± 4.0%, 7.0 ± 2.1% and 32.2 ± 1.1% in chicken, goat and cow manure respectively with highest mean reduction rate was in chicken manure. In contrast, S. dux has the highest mean manure reduction rate in goat manure, which was 25.0 ± 1.9%. This species reduced 23.0 ± 3% and 13.7 ± 1% of chicken and cow manure respectively (Table 5). The results showed that three different types of manures have significant effect (p < .05) on mean manure reduction rate of both species of flies.
Table 3 Mean dry mass of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure. Flies species
Type of manures
Mean ( ± S.E.) dry mass (g)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
0.04 0.23 0.32 0.62 0.29 0.23
S. dux
± ± ± ± ± ±
0.006a 0.009b 0.010b 0.013c 0.013d 0.011d
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure). 882
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong
meat such as liver under laboratory conditions (Sukontason et al., 2010). However, both of the species used in this study showed the potential in processing of poultry and livestock manures. Thus, the study of various fly species and their life histories might contribute to a greater variety of wastes suitable for degradation. To date, the emphasis has been focused on the use of insects to solve problems associated with accumulation of manure produced in animal facilities. Insects are having a significant role to convert many forms of waste and other nutrients in the environment. Other added benefit, insect's larvae technology that use for manure management is also produce a highquality animal feedstuff that could be used in animal feeding operations. The aeration and drying process occurred while insect larvae occupied manure, consuming and reducing microorganism (Erickson et al., 2004) as well as capable to convert into non-polluted residue, a substance similar to compost which prevent soil depletion (Dortmans et al., 2017) or as fertilizer used in agriculture. Reducing animal manures using both of the above insect species could be a simple and economical technique to include in animal waste management. However, further studies are needed to explore the capabilities of M. domestica and S. dux to increase the effectiveness of manure reduction process that can be exploited in low and middle-income countries.
able to feed on softer layer of the manures (Hewitt, 2011). Although M. domestica feed on a wide variety of sources, this species may have a certain preference with regard to nutrition contents (Malik et al., 2007). The difference in manure contents could be associated with the nutritive quality of the excrement, in which the chicken usually reared with protein-based food while the cow feeds on fodders, grasses or crop residues (Larraín and Salas, 2008). Although other component such as moisture content, chemical composition and the microflora of the manure could influence the larval development (Moon et al., 2001), the size and surface ratio of the manures is also important. The small size and high surface ratio of goat manures rapidly cause drying and coating conditions which contributed to the high mortality rate of larvae (Larraín and Salas, 2008). For S. dux, the increment of wet mass, larvae length and dry mass were the highest in chicken manure as compared to goat and cow manure. Moreover, the larval mortality rate in chicken manure was also the lowest but goat manure increased larval mortality rate in this species. The digestive system of goat is more efficient and aided by microorganisms while chicken's digestive system is more complicated started from the mouth, esophagus, crop, proventriculus, gizzard, duodenum, small intestine, large intestine and end in cloaca (Jacob and Pescatore, 2013). The food passes through the mouth and esophagus without moisturized and grounded (Svihus, 2011). On the other hand, goat's digestive system consists of mouth, esophagus, rumen, reticulum, omasum, abomasum, small intestine and large intestine. The food is chewed before stored in rumen. After fermented in rumen, the food are passed to reticulum and eventually forced up to mouth to be re-chewed. The digestion of food fermented by the microorganisms takes place in abomasum and absorption in small intestine (Cheng et al., 1991). Due to the differences in the digestion process, the nutrients retained in the manures samples were different. The efficiency in goat digestion causes the nutrients in the manures decreases and thus affects the development of the flies. Furthermore, the low development of larvae usually related to the nutritive value of manures, with low nitrogen and high carbon and fiber content (Bary et al., 2004). According to Moon et al. (2001), the moisture level of the organic material reduces as the temperature increase while the bacteria and other component that used by the larvae of flies as source of nutrients also decreased rapidly during composting process. Furthermore, the nutritive value of composted manures is highly reduced especially when the composting process is completed. Larraín and Salas (2008) indicated that the carbon and nitrogen ratio (C/N) is lower in chicken manure compared to cow manure. The lower the C/N ratio, the better quality of the manures due to enhancement of the microbial activity. Therefore, the larvae feed more on the microorganisms, which is essential factor for rapid development of the flies. Past research by Lalander et al. (2015) showed that other potential insect species, black soldier fly, Hermetia illucens decreased C/N ratio from 16.4 to 14.3 while Newton et al. (2005) indicated that 50% of manure reduction occurred while using this species and greatly reduced nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) mass. They also documented that various insect larvae readily feed on manure, reduce the nutrient concentration and manure residue, thus reducing pollution 50–60% or more. This study provides knowledge on the ability of house flies and flesh flies larvae to develop in different types of poultry and livestock manures. The ability of different species of fly larvae to develop in certain manures were different based on several factors such as moisture content, source of nutrients, chemical composition, microflora and age of the manure (Barnard et al., 1995; Broce and Haas, 1999; Moon et al., 2001; Mullens et al., 2002; Romero et al., 2006). The house fly larvae greatly develop in different types of manure compared to flesh fly larvae in the basis of less mortality rate recorded in this study (Table 4). House fly larvae is greatly known to have high reproduction rate with short development (Hogsette and Farkas, 2000), therefore make the house fly larvae as an ideal alternative of waste management in animal facilities. In contrast, flesh fly larvae usually develop well in decaying
Acknowledgement We thank ARASC, USM and owner of the livestock farm in Sungai Bakap, Seberang Perai, Penang for providing manure samples. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or non-profit sectors. References Barnard, D.R., Harms, R.H., Sloan, D.R., 1995. Influence of nitrogen, phosphorus, and calcium in poultry manure on survival, growth, and reproduction in house fly (Diptera: Muscidae). Environ. Entomol. 24 (5), 1297–1301. Bary, A., Cogger, C., Sullivan, D.M., 2004. Fertilizing with Manure. A Pacific Northwest Extension Publication. Washington State University, pp. 1–13. Bekele, A., McFarland, A.M.S., Whisenant, A.J., 2006. Impacts of a manure composting program on stream water. Trans. ASABE 389–400. Broce, A.B., Haas, M.S., 1999. Relation of cattle manure age to colonization by stable fly and house fly (Diptera: Muscidae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 60–72. Cekmecelioglu, D., Demirci, A., Graves, R.E., Davitt, N.H., 2005. Optimization of windrow food waste composting to inactivate pathogenic microorganisms. Trans. ASAE 2023–2032. Cheng, K.J., Forsberg, C.W., Minato, H., Costerton, J.W., 1991. Microbial ecology and physiology of feed degradation within the rumen. In: Tsuda, T., Sasaki, Y., Kawashima, R. (Eds.), Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants. Academic Press, Toronto, ON, pp. 595–624. Cherix, D., Wyss, C., Pape, T., 2012. Occurrences of flesh flies (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) on human cadavers in Switzerland, and their importance as forensic indicators. Forensic Sci. Int. 220 (1–3), 158–163. Čičková, H., Newton, G.L., Lacy, R.C., Kozánek, M., 2015. The use of fly larvae for organic waste treatment. Waste Manag. 35, 68–80. Dortmans, B.M.A., Diener, S., Verstappen, B.M., Zurbrügg, C., 2017. Black Soldier Fly Biowaste Processing. A Step-By-Step Guide. Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Dübendorf, Switzerland. Erickson, M.C., Islam, M., Sheppard, C., Liao, J., Doyle, M.P., 2004. Reduction of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar enteritidis in chicken manure by larvae of the black soldier fly. J. Food Prot. 685–690. Firoozfar, F., Moosa-Kazemi, H., Baniardalani, M., Abolhassani, M., Khoobdel, M., Rafinejd, J., 2011. Mass rearing of Lucilia sericata Meigen (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 1 (1), 54–56. Förster, M., Klimpel, S., Mehlhorn, H., Sievert, K., Messler, S., Pfeffer, K., 2007. Pilot study on synanthropic flies (eg Musca, Sarcophaga, Calliphora, Fannia, Lucilia, Stomoxys) as vectors of pathogenic microorganisms. Parasitol. Res. 101 (1), 243–246. Hewitt, C.G., 2011. The House-Fly: Musca domestica Linn: Its Structure, Habits, Development, Relation to Disease and Control. Cambridge University Press. Hogsette, J.A., 1992. New diets for production of house flies and stable flies (Diptera: Muscidae) in the laboratory. J. Econ. Entomol. 85 (6), 2291–2294. Hogsette, J.A., Farkas, R., 2000. Secretophagous and haematophagous higher Diptera. In: Contributions to a Manual of Palearctic Diptera. 1. pp. 769–792. Jacob, J., Pescatore, T., 2013. Avian Digestive System. University of Kentucky College of Agriculture, Food and Environment, Lexington, KY. Khan, H.A.A., Shad, S.A., Akram, W., 2012. Effect of livestock manures on the fitness of house fly, Musca domestica L. (Diptera: Muscidae). Parasitol. Res. 111 (3), 1165–1171. Lalander, C.H., Fidjeland, J., Diener, S., Eriksson, S., Vinnerås, B., 2015. High waste-to-
883
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong biomass conversion and efficient Salmonella spp. reduction using black soldier fly for waste recycling. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35 (1), 261–271. Larraín, P., Salas, C., 2008. House fly (Musca domestica L.) (Diptera: Muscidae) development in different types of manure. Chilean J. Agricult. Res. 68, 192–197. Malik, A., Singh, N., Satya, S., 2007. House fly (Musca domestica): a review of control strategies for a challenging pest. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 42 (4), 453–469. Moon, R.D., Hinton, J.L., O'Rourke, S.D., Schmidt, D.R., 2001. Nutritional value of fresh and composted poultry manure for house fly (Diptera: Muscidae) larvae. J. Econ. Entomol. 94 (5), 1308–1317. Mullens, B.A., Szijj, C.E., Hinkle, N.C., 2002. Oviposition and development of Fannia spp. (Diptera: Muscidae) on poultry manure of low moisture levels. Environ. Entomol. 31 (4), 588–593. Newton, G.L., Sheppard, D.C., Watson, D.W., Burtle, G.J., Dove, C.R., Tomberlin, J.K., Thelen, E.E., 2005. The black soldier fly, Hermetia illucens, as a manure management/ resource recovery tool. In: Symposium on the State of the Science of Animal Manure
and Waste Management, pp. 5–7. Romero, A., Broce, A., Zurek, L., 2006. Role of bacteria in the oviposition behaviour and larval development of stable flies. Med. Vet. Entomol. 20 (1), 115–121. Sukontason, K., Bunchu, N., Chaiwong, T., Moophayak, K., Sukontason, K.L., 2010. Forensically important flesh fly species in Thailand: morphology and developmental rate. Parasitol. Res. 106 (5), 1055–1064. Svihus, B., 2011. The gizzard: function, influence of diet structure and effects on nutrient availability. J. World's Poultry Sci. 67, 207–223. Turnell, J.R., Faulkner, R.D., Hinch, G.N., 2007. Recent advances in Australian broiler litter utilisation. J. World's Poultry Sci. 223–231. Williams, A.P., Roberts, P., Avery, L.M., Killham, K., Jones, D.L., 2006. Earthworms as vectors of Escherichia coli in soil and vermiculture. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 54–64. Zhang, Z., Wang, J.N., Zhang, B., Liu, H.R., Song, W., He, J., Lv, D., Wang, S., Xu, X.G., 2013. Activity of antibacterial protein from maggots against Staphylococcus aureus in vitro and in vivo. Int. J. Mol. Med. 31 (5), 1159–1165.
884
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jape
Growth of Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) and Sarcophaga dux (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) larvae in poultry and livestock manures: Implication for animal waste management
T
⁎
Hadura Abu Hasan , Kam Phun Leong Vector Control Research Unit, School of Biological Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Minden, Penang, Malaysia
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Growth Poultry Livestock Manures Musca domestica Sarcophaga dux
Natural diets commonly exploited by the flies are animal manures including production from the poultry and livestock facilities. The larvae of the common filth flies such as Musca domestica and Sarcophaga dux are known as voracious feeders and may thus be used to convert manures into non-polluted residue. This study was conducted to observe the impact on flies' growth rate and capability of the larvae to process animal manures using chicken, goat and cow manures. One hundred newly hatched larvae of M. domestica and S. dux were introduced separately into 150 g manures under laboratory conditions. The initial wet mass and larvae length were recorded while mortality rate and dry mass were measured after the larvae were placed into the manures. The results showed that the manure types give significant effects (p < .05) on the growth of M. domestica and S. dux larvae. Cow manures and chicken manures contributed the highest growth for M. domestica and S. dux respectively. This result confirmed by the mean increment in wet mass and larvae length. In contrast, M. domestica greatly reduced 59.9 ± 4% chicken manures while 25.0 ± 1.8% goat manures reduced by S. dux. The potential of M. domestica and S. dux larvae to reduce animal waste products were further discussed in this study.
Introduction The demand of poultry and livestock productions are increased as the human population increases. This directly leads to vast increases in production of manures from the poultry and livestock facilities. Recently, about 700,000 metrics tonnes of broiler waste are produced annually worldwide (Turnell et al., 2007) and it is expected to be continuing to expand in the near future. Increase in manures from poultry and livestock not only polluted the environment, but also increased the risk of spreading diseases. This situation usually attracted many insect vectors and other pathogens such as Escherichia coli that commonly found in animal manures (Williams et al., 2006). Different methods are used to cope with the increasing production of manures. In the past, the common method used was land application. However, it is proven to be source of nonpoint pollution for soluble phosphorus (Bekele et al., 2006) and the leaching of excess nitrogen and other elements, which may contaminate soil and water. Another method is composting which used to recycle solid waste (Turnell et al., 2007) or animal manures (Cekmecelioglu et al., 2005) which can be used as fertilizers. However, in this process, carbon is added to facilitate the oxidation process of the manures (Erickson et al., 2004) in order to
⁎
reduce the bulky materials of the manure and therefore increase the cost of composting. The other potential method recently used in composting is by using larvae of dipterous flies. The house fly, M. domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) is one of the vector of medical and veterinary importance that cause diseases and nuisance to human and animals (Förster et al., 2007) while S. dux (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) which is commonly known as a flesh fly is also a species of medical importance in many part of the world (Cherix et al., 2012). Although many of the fly species are considered as major pests, they are also used for biodegradation of organic waste and play an important role in the recycling of organic matter in nature (Čičková et al., 2015). The larvae of flies contained biologically active substance, such as antimicrobial peptides, lectin and chitin (Zhang et al., 2013) which will be benefit to reduce the manures and help in composting organic waste. This study was carried out to evaluate the effects of different manures on the growth rate of M. domestica and S. dux. Secondly, the efficiency of manures reduction were compared between two species of flies and finally the optimum growth in three types of manures of two species flies were also identified.
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Abu Hasan).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2018.07.001 Received 5 March 2018; Received in revised form 27 June 2018; Accepted 2 July 2018 Available online 03 July 2018 1226-8615/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Korean Society of Applied Entomology.
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong
Materials and methods
Percentage average larvae length increament Larvae length before − Larvae length after = × 100% Larvae length before
Manure samples The poultry manures were obtained from Animal Research and Service Centre (ARASC), Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) while the cow and goat manures were obtained from livestock farm at (5°15′00.4″N 100°29′31.0″E) Sungai Bakap, Seberang Perai, Penang, Malaysia.
Mortality rate =
Number of dead larvae × 100% 100
Percentage of manure reduction =
Rearing of M. domestica
150−remaining manure mass × 100% 150
Statistical analysis
The larvae of M. domestica were obtained from Vector Control Research Unit (VCRU), USM. The rearing method for M. domestica was modified from Hogsette (1992). Both of the species flies were reared at 30–33 °C and 59–66% relative humidity with a photoperiod of light and dark (9:15) in insectary at VCRU, USM. Adults of M. domestica were provided with constant access to 10% sucrose solution and milk powder in a Petri dish. Female house flies were allowed to oviposit into a mixture of 200 g mouse pellet and 200 ml water in a ratio of 1:1 in a plastic container (14 cm × 8.5 cm × 6.5 cm) inside the cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm). Crevices were made on the medium surface for female house flies to lay their eggs. This plastic container with eggs were then transferred to a new cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm), and the eggs hatched within 12 to 15 h. After four to five days, the larvae developed into pupae. Adult flies emerged five to six days after the formation of initial pupa.
All the data and results obtained were interpreted with univariate ANOVA, with subsequent Tukey HSD tests to determine the differences between the various treatments. Differences will be accepted as statistically significant when p < .05 by using Version 22.0 IBM SPSS Statistics analyser. Results Effects of three different types of manure on wet mass of M. domestica and S. dux For M. domestica, the greatest mean increment of wet mass ( ± standard error, S.E.) was recorded in cow manure (324.7 ± 43.6%). Mean increment of wet mass recorded in chicken manure and goat manure were 211.8 ± 43.9% and 280.3 ± 15.5% respectively. For S. dux, the most increment of wet mass was recorded in chicken manure (269.7 ± 15.7%) while the least mean increment was recorded in goat manure (81.2 ± 7.9%). The increment of wet mass of S. dux recorded in cow manure was 124.0 ± 22.0% (Table 1). The results showed that the mean increment of wet mass was significantly different (p < .05) for both species of flies developed in three different types of manure. However, analysis of Tukey test showed that the type of manures exhibit no significant different (p > .05) in mean increment of wet mass among the two species of flies (Table 1).
Rearing of S. dux The larvae of S. dux were sampled near student accommodation (5°21′25.0″N 100°17′34.9″E) in USM using raw fish as an attractant. The rearing methods were modified based on Firoozfar et al. (2011). The flesh flies were reared under similar conditions as house flies inside the insectary. Adults of S. dux were also provided with constant access to 10% sucrose solution and milk powder in a Petri dish. Adult flesh flies were allowed to mate, and female flies were allowed to oviposit into a medium of raw fish in a plastic container (14 cm × 8.5 cm × 6.5 cm) inside each cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm). This plastic container with eggs was then transferred to a new cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm) for development of larvae and pupae. The eggs hatched within 24 h and these newly hatched larvae fed on the raw fish. After four days, the larvae developed into pre-pupae stage. The pre-pupae stage developed into pupae within four to five days and the pupae remained for 10–14 days before finally emerged into adults.
Effects of three different types of manure on larvae length of M. domestica and S. dux The low increment of larvae length of M. domestica and S. dux were recorded in goat manure, which were 62.0 ± 13.2% and 47.1 ± 4.8% respectively. The increment of larvae length of M. domestica that reared in chicken manure was 190.2 ± 40.4% while the greater mean increment of larvae length was recorded in cow manure (231.9 ± 13.5%). In contrast, mean increment of larvae length of S. dux were only 29.5 ± 7.0% recorded in cow manure. In chicken manure, the mean increment of larvae length was 64.2 ± 6.8%, indicating that chicken manure was the greater medium for the growth of S. dux (Table 2.) The results indicated that the mean increment of larvae length were significantly different (p < .05) for both species of flies developed in three different manures.
The effect of different types of manure on M. domestica and S. dux larvae biomass One hundred newly hatched larvae were measured for wet mass and larval length before placed into chicken manure, cow manure and goat manure respectively for four days under controlled temperature and humidity in the insectary. All manures were weighed 150 g before the larvae were introduced. After four days, the larvae were removed and rinsed with tap water. The wet mass of each larvae were measured and the mortality rate was recorded. The length of the larvae were measured using a ruler with 0.1 mm scaling. The remaining manure were weighed and the percentages of reduction in weight were also calculated. The larvae were kept dry for three days at 50 °C and dry mass of each larvae were then measured. Five replicates were conducted for each manure and the larvae biomass were calculated as follows:
Table 1 Mean increment of wet mass of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure. Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) increment of wet mass (%)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
211.8 ± 43.9a 280.3 ± 15.5a 324.7 ± 43.6a 269.7 ± 15.7b 81.2 ± 7.9b 124.0 ± 22.0b
S. dux
Percentage average wet mass increament Wet mass before − Wet mass after = × 100% Wet mass before
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure). 881
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong
Table 2 Mean increment of larvae length of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure.
Table 4 Mean mortality rate of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure.
Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) increment of larvae length (%)
Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) mortality rate (%)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
190.2 ± 40.4a 62.0 ± 13.2a 231.9 ± 13.5b 64.2 ± 6.8c 47.1 ± 4.8c 29.5 ± 7.0d
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
0a 7.2 ± 1.7b 6.0 ± 0.6b 11.2 ± 1.5c 24 ± 1.7d 20.4 ± 0.8d
S. dux
S. dux
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure).
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure).
Effects of three different types of manure on dry mass of M. domestica and S. dux
Table 5 Mean manure reduction rate of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure.
In chicken manure, mean dry mass recorded for M. domestica was 0.04 ± 0.006 g whereas mean dry mass recorded for S. dux was 0.62 ± 0.013 g. In contrast, M. domestica resulted the highest mean dry mass in cow manure, which was 0.32 ± 0.010 g. In goat manure, this species only produced 0.23 ± 0.009 g of mean dry mass. On the other hand, S. dux caused the least mean dry mass in cow manure and followed by goat manure with 0.23 ± 0.011 g and 0.29 ± 0.013 g respectively (Table 3.). According to the Tukey test, the results demonstrated that the dry mass were significantly different (p < .05) for both species of flies developed in three different manures.
Flies species
Types of manure
Mean ( ± S.E.) manure reduction rate (%)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
59.9 ± 4.0a 7.0 ± 2.1b 32.2 ± 1.1c 23.0 ± 3.0d 25.0 ± 1.9e 13.7 ± 1.0f
S. dux
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure).
Discussion and conclusion Mortality rate
The results showed that different types of manure give significant effects (p < .05) on M. domestica and S. dux larvae. Among three types of manures, cow manure showed the highest growth rate on M. domestica, but S. dux significantly developed in chicken manure, supported by the evidence from the mean increment in wet mass and larvae length. M. domestica resulted the greatest mean dry mass in cow manure, while S. dux in chicken manure. Both M. domestica and S. dux have the highest percentage of mortality rate in goat manure. On the other hand, highest percentage of mean manure reduction by M. domestica occurred in chicken manure while for S. dux in goat manure. The efficient growth of M. domestica was supported by the greatest wet mass and larvae length (Tables 1 & 2). In contrast, previous study by Khan et al. (2012) demonstrated that the rate of development of M. domestica was faster in poultry manure compared to the other livestock manures. Other previous study by Larraín and Salas (2008) also revealed that development of M. domestica in cow manure was significantly lower compared to chicken manure although the moisture content recorded in those study were 78% and 65% in cow and chicken manures respectively. The moisture content which was not recorded in this current study is believed to permit the growth of M. domestica in cow manure. In contrast with the results obtained from the wet mass and larvae length, the mortality rate of M. domestica and S. dux larvae were relatively low in the treatment of chicken manure. By most of the criteria measured above, growth of M. domestica was less effective in goat manure compared to chicken and cow manures. Despite this species resulted a comparable weight of wet and dry mass, the increment in larvae length was the lowest in goat manure. Moreover, the mortality rate for both species of flies were greatly recorded in goat manure compared to chicken and cow manures (Table 4). The primary reason of the greater mortality of both species in goat manure might be the texture and its viscosity. Due to the nature of the manures, cow manure were more compact than goat manure, thus the leaching rate of nutrients and moisture were different, resulting in cow manure were softer and moister while goat manure were harder and drier. The well aerated and soft substrate were dominated by the larvae to prevent from suffocation. If the medium was hard to penetrate, the larvae were only
Both M. domestica and S. dux have the lowest mean mortality rate in chicken manure, which were 0% and 11.2 ± 1.5% respectively. Both M. domestica and S. dux have the highest mean mortality rate when reared in goat manure, which were 7.2 ± 1.7% and 24 ± 1.7% respectively. Cow manure caused mean mortality rate of 6.0 ± 0.6% and 20.4 ± 0.8% on M. domestica and S. dux respectively (Table 4.). The Tukey test showed that both species of flies have significantly lower mortality rate in chicken manure compared to goat and cow manures. Therefore, different types of manures give significant effects (p < .05) on mean mortality rate between both species of flies.
Manure reduction rate Mean manure reduction rate for M. domestica were 59.9 ± 4.0%, 7.0 ± 2.1% and 32.2 ± 1.1% in chicken, goat and cow manure respectively with highest mean reduction rate was in chicken manure. In contrast, S. dux has the highest mean manure reduction rate in goat manure, which was 25.0 ± 1.9%. This species reduced 23.0 ± 3% and 13.7 ± 1% of chicken and cow manure respectively (Table 5). The results showed that three different types of manures have significant effect (p < .05) on mean manure reduction rate of both species of flies.
Table 3 Mean dry mass of M. domestica and S. dux in three different types of manure. Flies species
Type of manures
Mean ( ± S.E.) dry mass (g)
M. domestica
Chicken Goat Cow Chicken Goat Cow
0.04 0.23 0.32 0.62 0.29 0.23
S. dux
± ± ± ± ± ±
0.006a 0.009b 0.010b 0.013c 0.013d 0.011d
Mean followed by the same letters in a column within a species were not significantly different (p > .05, Tukey's procedure). 882
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong
meat such as liver under laboratory conditions (Sukontason et al., 2010). However, both of the species used in this study showed the potential in processing of poultry and livestock manures. Thus, the study of various fly species and their life histories might contribute to a greater variety of wastes suitable for degradation. To date, the emphasis has been focused on the use of insects to solve problems associated with accumulation of manure produced in animal facilities. Insects are having a significant role to convert many forms of waste and other nutrients in the environment. Other added benefit, insect's larvae technology that use for manure management is also produce a highquality animal feedstuff that could be used in animal feeding operations. The aeration and drying process occurred while insect larvae occupied manure, consuming and reducing microorganism (Erickson et al., 2004) as well as capable to convert into non-polluted residue, a substance similar to compost which prevent soil depletion (Dortmans et al., 2017) or as fertilizer used in agriculture. Reducing animal manures using both of the above insect species could be a simple and economical technique to include in animal waste management. However, further studies are needed to explore the capabilities of M. domestica and S. dux to increase the effectiveness of manure reduction process that can be exploited in low and middle-income countries.
able to feed on softer layer of the manures (Hewitt, 2011). Although M. domestica feed on a wide variety of sources, this species may have a certain preference with regard to nutrition contents (Malik et al., 2007). The difference in manure contents could be associated with the nutritive quality of the excrement, in which the chicken usually reared with protein-based food while the cow feeds on fodders, grasses or crop residues (Larraín and Salas, 2008). Although other component such as moisture content, chemical composition and the microflora of the manure could influence the larval development (Moon et al., 2001), the size and surface ratio of the manures is also important. The small size and high surface ratio of goat manures rapidly cause drying and coating conditions which contributed to the high mortality rate of larvae (Larraín and Salas, 2008). For S. dux, the increment of wet mass, larvae length and dry mass were the highest in chicken manure as compared to goat and cow manure. Moreover, the larval mortality rate in chicken manure was also the lowest but goat manure increased larval mortality rate in this species. The digestive system of goat is more efficient and aided by microorganisms while chicken's digestive system is more complicated started from the mouth, esophagus, crop, proventriculus, gizzard, duodenum, small intestine, large intestine and end in cloaca (Jacob and Pescatore, 2013). The food passes through the mouth and esophagus without moisturized and grounded (Svihus, 2011). On the other hand, goat's digestive system consists of mouth, esophagus, rumen, reticulum, omasum, abomasum, small intestine and large intestine. The food is chewed before stored in rumen. After fermented in rumen, the food are passed to reticulum and eventually forced up to mouth to be re-chewed. The digestion of food fermented by the microorganisms takes place in abomasum and absorption in small intestine (Cheng et al., 1991). Due to the differences in the digestion process, the nutrients retained in the manures samples were different. The efficiency in goat digestion causes the nutrients in the manures decreases and thus affects the development of the flies. Furthermore, the low development of larvae usually related to the nutritive value of manures, with low nitrogen and high carbon and fiber content (Bary et al., 2004). According to Moon et al. (2001), the moisture level of the organic material reduces as the temperature increase while the bacteria and other component that used by the larvae of flies as source of nutrients also decreased rapidly during composting process. Furthermore, the nutritive value of composted manures is highly reduced especially when the composting process is completed. Larraín and Salas (2008) indicated that the carbon and nitrogen ratio (C/N) is lower in chicken manure compared to cow manure. The lower the C/N ratio, the better quality of the manures due to enhancement of the microbial activity. Therefore, the larvae feed more on the microorganisms, which is essential factor for rapid development of the flies. Past research by Lalander et al. (2015) showed that other potential insect species, black soldier fly, Hermetia illucens decreased C/N ratio from 16.4 to 14.3 while Newton et al. (2005) indicated that 50% of manure reduction occurred while using this species and greatly reduced nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) mass. They also documented that various insect larvae readily feed on manure, reduce the nutrient concentration and manure residue, thus reducing pollution 50–60% or more. This study provides knowledge on the ability of house flies and flesh flies larvae to develop in different types of poultry and livestock manures. The ability of different species of fly larvae to develop in certain manures were different based on several factors such as moisture content, source of nutrients, chemical composition, microflora and age of the manure (Barnard et al., 1995; Broce and Haas, 1999; Moon et al., 2001; Mullens et al., 2002; Romero et al., 2006). The house fly larvae greatly develop in different types of manure compared to flesh fly larvae in the basis of less mortality rate recorded in this study (Table 4). House fly larvae is greatly known to have high reproduction rate with short development (Hogsette and Farkas, 2000), therefore make the house fly larvae as an ideal alternative of waste management in animal facilities. In contrast, flesh fly larvae usually develop well in decaying
Acknowledgement We thank ARASC, USM and owner of the livestock farm in Sungai Bakap, Seberang Perai, Penang for providing manure samples. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or non-profit sectors. References Barnard, D.R., Harms, R.H., Sloan, D.R., 1995. Influence of nitrogen, phosphorus, and calcium in poultry manure on survival, growth, and reproduction in house fly (Diptera: Muscidae). Environ. Entomol. 24 (5), 1297–1301. Bary, A., Cogger, C., Sullivan, D.M., 2004. Fertilizing with Manure. A Pacific Northwest Extension Publication. Washington State University, pp. 1–13. Bekele, A., McFarland, A.M.S., Whisenant, A.J., 2006. Impacts of a manure composting program on stream water. Trans. ASABE 389–400. Broce, A.B., Haas, M.S., 1999. Relation of cattle manure age to colonization by stable fly and house fly (Diptera: Muscidae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 60–72. Cekmecelioglu, D., Demirci, A., Graves, R.E., Davitt, N.H., 2005. Optimization of windrow food waste composting to inactivate pathogenic microorganisms. Trans. ASAE 2023–2032. Cheng, K.J., Forsberg, C.W., Minato, H., Costerton, J.W., 1991. Microbial ecology and physiology of feed degradation within the rumen. In: Tsuda, T., Sasaki, Y., Kawashima, R. (Eds.), Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants. Academic Press, Toronto, ON, pp. 595–624. Cherix, D., Wyss, C., Pape, T., 2012. Occurrences of flesh flies (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) on human cadavers in Switzerland, and their importance as forensic indicators. Forensic Sci. Int. 220 (1–3), 158–163. Čičková, H., Newton, G.L., Lacy, R.C., Kozánek, M., 2015. The use of fly larvae for organic waste treatment. Waste Manag. 35, 68–80. Dortmans, B.M.A., Diener, S., Verstappen, B.M., Zurbrügg, C., 2017. Black Soldier Fly Biowaste Processing. A Step-By-Step Guide. Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Dübendorf, Switzerland. Erickson, M.C., Islam, M., Sheppard, C., Liao, J., Doyle, M.P., 2004. Reduction of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar enteritidis in chicken manure by larvae of the black soldier fly. J. Food Prot. 685–690. Firoozfar, F., Moosa-Kazemi, H., Baniardalani, M., Abolhassani, M., Khoobdel, M., Rafinejd, J., 2011. Mass rearing of Lucilia sericata Meigen (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 1 (1), 54–56. Förster, M., Klimpel, S., Mehlhorn, H., Sievert, K., Messler, S., Pfeffer, K., 2007. Pilot study on synanthropic flies (eg Musca, Sarcophaga, Calliphora, Fannia, Lucilia, Stomoxys) as vectors of pathogenic microorganisms. Parasitol. Res. 101 (1), 243–246. Hewitt, C.G., 2011. The House-Fly: Musca domestica Linn: Its Structure, Habits, Development, Relation to Disease and Control. Cambridge University Press. Hogsette, J.A., 1992. New diets for production of house flies and stable flies (Diptera: Muscidae) in the laboratory. J. Econ. Entomol. 85 (6), 2291–2294. Hogsette, J.A., Farkas, R., 2000. Secretophagous and haematophagous higher Diptera. In: Contributions to a Manual of Palearctic Diptera. 1. pp. 769–792. Jacob, J., Pescatore, T., 2013. Avian Digestive System. University of Kentucky College of Agriculture, Food and Environment, Lexington, KY. Khan, H.A.A., Shad, S.A., Akram, W., 2012. Effect of livestock manures on the fitness of house fly, Musca domestica L. (Diptera: Muscidae). Parasitol. Res. 111 (3), 1165–1171. Lalander, C.H., Fidjeland, J., Diener, S., Eriksson, S., Vinnerås, B., 2015. High waste-to-
883
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 21 (2018) 880–884
H. Abu Hasan, K.P. Leong biomass conversion and efficient Salmonella spp. reduction using black soldier fly for waste recycling. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35 (1), 261–271. Larraín, P., Salas, C., 2008. House fly (Musca domestica L.) (Diptera: Muscidae) development in different types of manure. Chilean J. Agricult. Res. 68, 192–197. Malik, A., Singh, N., Satya, S., 2007. House fly (Musca domestica): a review of control strategies for a challenging pest. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 42 (4), 453–469. Moon, R.D., Hinton, J.L., O'Rourke, S.D., Schmidt, D.R., 2001. Nutritional value of fresh and composted poultry manure for house fly (Diptera: Muscidae) larvae. J. Econ. Entomol. 94 (5), 1308–1317. Mullens, B.A., Szijj, C.E., Hinkle, N.C., 2002. Oviposition and development of Fannia spp. (Diptera: Muscidae) on poultry manure of low moisture levels. Environ. Entomol. 31 (4), 588–593. Newton, G.L., Sheppard, D.C., Watson, D.W., Burtle, G.J., Dove, C.R., Tomberlin, J.K., Thelen, E.E., 2005. The black soldier fly, Hermetia illucens, as a manure management/ resource recovery tool. In: Symposium on the State of the Science of Animal Manure
and Waste Management, pp. 5–7. Romero, A., Broce, A., Zurek, L., 2006. Role of bacteria in the oviposition behaviour and larval development of stable flies. Med. Vet. Entomol. 20 (1), 115–121. Sukontason, K., Bunchu, N., Chaiwong, T., Moophayak, K., Sukontason, K.L., 2010. Forensically important flesh fly species in Thailand: morphology and developmental rate. Parasitol. Res. 106 (5), 1055–1064. Svihus, B., 2011. The gizzard: function, influence of diet structure and effects on nutrient availability. J. World's Poultry Sci. 67, 207–223. Turnell, J.R., Faulkner, R.D., Hinch, G.N., 2007. Recent advances in Australian broiler litter utilisation. J. World's Poultry Sci. 223–231. Williams, A.P., Roberts, P., Avery, L.M., Killham, K., Jones, D.L., 2006. Earthworms as vectors of Escherichia coli in soil and vermiculture. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 54–64. Zhang, Z., Wang, J.N., Zhang, B., Liu, H.R., Song, W., He, J., Lv, D., Wang, S., Xu, X.G., 2013. Activity of antibacterial protein from maggots against Staphylococcus aureus in vitro and in vivo. Int. J. Mol. Med. 31 (5), 1159–1165.
884