agriculture

Article
Spatiotemporal Distribution Patterns of Pest Species
(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Affected by Meteorological Factors in
an Agroecosystem
Zafar Hussain 1 , Zahid Mahmood Sarwar 1 , Atif Akbar 2 , Sadeq K. Alhag 3,4 , Nazeer Ahmed 5, * , Pravej Alam 6 ,
Abdulrahman A. Almadiy 7 , Ferjeni Zouidi 3 and Nilesh Baburao Jawalkar 8

1 Department of Entomology, FAST Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan 60800, Pakistan

2 Department of Statistics, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan 60800, Pakistan
3 Biology Department, College of Science and Arts, King Khalid University, Muhayl Asser 63751, Saudi Arabia
4 Biology Department, College of Science, Ibb University, Ibb X57F+58P, Yemen
5 Department of Agriculture, University of Swabi, Anbar 23561, Pakistan
6 Department of Biology, College of Science and Humanities, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University,
Al-Kharj 16278, Saudi Arabia
7 Department of Biology, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Najran University, Najran 1988, Saudi Arabia
8 Department of Zoology, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad 431004, India
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Knowing pests’ spatiotemporal distribution patterns is essential for forecasting population
outbreaks and designing control tactics or long-term management plans. The family Noctuidae
is one of the largest families of the Lepidoptera order. The noctuid’s moths are well represented
in all zoogeographic regions in various habitats and have immeasurable ecological and economic
importance. Although the species’ ecology has been extensively studied, little is known about
Citation: Hussain, Z.; Sarwar, Z.M.;
the spatial and temporal distribution patterns of noctuid moths in an agroecosystem. Therefore,
Akbar, A.; Alhag, S.K.; Ahmed, N.;
Alam, P.; Almadiy, A.A.; Zouidi, F.;
in this study, the spatial and temporal fluctuations in the abundance of 24 important species in
Jawalkar, N.B. Spatiotemporal the family were quantified. Yellow light traps were mounted in 11 different selected localities of
Distribution Patterns of Pest Species the Multan district. The maximum species abundance was observed in September but declined
(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Affected by in December, January, and February. Spatial contour maps were used to determine the species’
Meteorological Factors in an dissemination over space. Meteorological factors such as temperature and humidity showed a
Agroecosystem. Agriculture 2022, 12, significantly positive correlation, while rainfall showed a significantly negative correlation, with
2003. https://doi.org/10.3390/ species richness. The maximum species abundance was recorded in crop areas as compared to forest
agriculture12122003
areas. This study provides a scientific basis for developing and timely applying control strategies for
Academic Editor: Renata Bažok localized pest control.

Received: 5 September 2022

Keywords: spatiotemporal; Lepidoptera; Noctuidae; genitalia; abundance
Accepted: 21 November 2022
Published: 24 November 2022

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

with regard to jurisdictional claims in 1. Introduction
published maps and institutional affil-
The Lepidoptera order is one of the most predominant terrestrial orders, which per-
iations.
forms an important role in an agroecosystem, including pollination, nutrient cycling, decom-
position, and providing prey for passerine birds [1]. Noctuidae is probably the most ruling
(prominent or dominant) macro-Lepidopteran family, with more than 35,000 recognized
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
species belonging to 29 subfamilies and 4200 genera. The adults are nocturnal and attracted
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. to a light source [2]. Due to the heavy feeding inflicted on plants by the larvae, noctuids
This article is an open access article are typically considered to be important pests of agroecological system. The immature
distributed under the terms and feed on field crops and cause massive economic losses in maize [3], soybean [4], wheat [5],
conditions of the Creative Commons cotton [6], and rice [7]. Lepidopteran pests generate losses by reducing plant yield and
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// necessitating costly control measures [8].
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ There is detailed knowledge regarding population abundance as a function of spa-
4.0/). tiotemporal factors explained by weather variables such as temperature and humidity [9].

Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12122003 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agriculture

Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 2 of 16

Due to their ectothermic physiology, insects are extremely sensitive to climatic fluctua-
tions and exhibit swings in response to a changing climate [10]. Many arthropod species
are restricted in their spread by environmental variables such as temperature and pre-
cipitation [11]. Additionally, the agricultural landscape complexity and host diversity
influence insect abundance [12]. The abundance of noctuid species varies with changes
in the agricultural landscape structure at various scales. Their dispersal ability influences
the abundance of insects in agricultural landscapes, reproductive success on different host
plants, the spatiotemporal distributions of suitable crops and other habitats, and agronomic
practices [13]. The spatial distribution of insect populations is important for understanding
biotic and abiotic factors’ interactions to form ecological connections [14].
Previously, the spatiotemporal behavior of different insect pest species have been eval-
uated, including Neoleucinodes elegantalis in South America [15], H. armigera and Pectinophora
gossypiella in Greece [16], and S. furgiperda in Mexico [17]. Although the spatiotemporal
behavior of different species has been determined in other countries, the knowledge is
limited, particularly in Pakistan.
Overall, this study shows the value of the spatial and temporal abundance of different
Noctuidae family species that damage economically important crops from localities in
Multan, Punjab-Pakistan. The influence of temperature, humidity, and rainfall on species
abundance was determined. The present study was conducted to characterize the spatial
distribution of the Noctuid species. We analyzed the daily changes in population patterns
and the influence of certain meteorological factors on the insect populations. Spatial
analysis produced a spatial trend map over space, a temporal stability map over time,
and a spatial and temporal trend map for Noctuid species and correlations between other
meteorological factors, temperature, and relative humidity, with insect populations, which
could lead to separating the field into management zones and direct control over areas that
exhibit high densities of the pest population and are stable over time. This study may also
be useful for developing an effective and suitable management strategy for noctuid pest
control. This is a new approach that assists the sampling of highly diverse populations of
nocturnal insect pests quickly.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area
Samples of the family Noctuidae were collected from 11 different selected localities
of Multan (29◦ 190 1100 to 30◦ 280 16 N and 70◦ 580 3400 to 71◦ 430 2500 E) through funnel-shaped
light traps [18] from July 2020 to June 2021. All traps were installed at 7ft high from the
ground surface, and these traps were operated with yellow light bulbs (100 Watt, λ 560
nm). Data were collected on daily basis. The coordinates, i.e., the longitude and latitude of
all the traps, were determined using a global positioning system (GPS). All the light traps
were installed in different habitats (Figure 1; Table 1). Traps (T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, and T6)
were installed in an urban area, but the remaining traps, including T7, T8, T9, T10, and T11,
were installed five km away from an urban area. The meteorological data were collected
from the meteorological department of the Central Cotton Research Institute (CCRI) in the
Multan district.

2.2. Collection and Preservation

The insects were killed in a killing jar from each trap every day and killed trap-wise
(Specimens from each trap were killed separately) using potassium cyanide killing jars.
The insects were relaxed prior to pinning by placing them in a petri dish wrapped in a
wet cloth. The body parts were spread properly, positioned on the stretching board, and
dried for 2 to 3 days. Then, the dried specimens were saved in airtight wooden boxes along
with naphthalene tablets to protect the samples from predators and other insects such as
ants. All the specimens were tagged, including the information of the collector’s name,
trap number, specimen number, locality, date, and host.
Agriculture 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 3 of 16

Figure 1. Geographical location map of traps, installed at different sites in the Multan district,
Figure 1. Geographical location map of traps, installed at different sites in the Multan district, Pun-
Punjab, Pakistan.
jab, Pakistan.
Table 1. The coordinates i.e., latitude and longitude of the traps, installed in different habitats.
Table 1. The coordinates i.e., latitude and longitude of the traps, installed in different habitats.
Traps Coordinates Habitat Location
Traps Coordinates Habitat Location
T1 29.7591 N; 71.3203 E Cotton, Rice, Maize, Tomato Crop area/Near urban
T1 29.7591 N; 71.3203
T2E Cotton,
29.8255 Rice,
N; 71.5593 E Maize, Tomato
Maize, Rice, MungCrop
bean area/NearCrop
urban
area/Near urban
T2 29.8255 N; 71.5593
T3E Maize, Rice,
29.9017 N; 71.2915 E Mung bean Forest Crop area/Near urban
Forest area/Near urban
T3 29.9017 N; 71.2915
T4E 30.0468 N; 71.5044 Forest
E Forest Forest area/Near urban
Forest area/Near urban
T4 30.0468 N; 71.5044
T5E 30.1491 N; 71.4387 Forest
E Forest Forest area/Near urban
Forest area/Near urban
T6 30.0960 N; 71.6275 E Rice, Maize, Sugarcane Crop area/Near urban
T5 30.1491 N; 71.4387 E Forest Forest area/Near urban
T7 30.2497 N; 71.7916 E Maize, Cotton, Cabbage, Tomato, Okra Crop area/Away urban
T6 30.0960 N; 71.6275
T8E Rice, Maize,
30.3138 N; 71.4565 E Sugarcane Crop
Cotton, Cabbage, Okra, area/NearCrop
Grasses urban
area/Away urban
T9 Maize,
30.3440 Cotton,E Cabbage, Tomato,
N; 71.6446 Cotton, Maize Crop area/Away urban
T7 30.2497 N; 71.7916
T10E Crop area/Away urban
Okra Cotton, Maize, tomato, Sorghum
30.0080 N; 71.3404 E Crop area/Away urban
T11 30.2646 N; 71.5526 E Maize, Cotton, Cabbage, Okra Crop area/Away urban
T8 30.3138 N; 71.4565 E Cotton, Cabbage, Okra, Grasses Crop area/Away urban
T9 30.3440 N; 71.6446 E Cotton, Maize Crop area/Away urban
T10 2.3.
30.0080 N; 71.3404 EGenitalia Extraction and Identification
Cotton, Maize, tomato, Sorghum Crop area/Away urban
T11 30.2646 N; 71.5526 The
E genital Maize, Cotton, Cabbage,
characteristics do notOkra Crop area/Away
change morphologically and urban
are used widely for
the identification of insect species, because they provide a reliable technique to distinguish
2.2. species.
CollectionThe
andgenitals were dissected following the techniques described by Sajjad et al. [19].
Preservation
The abdomen was cut from the moth’s body using forceps and scissors and dipped in 10%
The insects were killed in a killing jar from each trap every day and killed trap-wise
potassium hydroxide solution for 12 h. The insect abdomen was dissected with the help
(Specimens from each trap were killed separately) using potassium cyanide killing jars.
of needles under a microscope. The genitalia were washed in distilled water to remove
TheKOHinsects were relaxed
particles prior in
and dipped to 70%
pinning by placing
ethanol solutionthem in athe
to clear petri dish
parts wrapped
of the in aThe
genitalia.
wet collected
cloth. Thesamples
body parts were spread properly, positioned on the stretching board,
were identified up to species level on the basis of the genitalia with and the
dried for 2 to 3 days. Then, the dried specimens were saved in airtight wooden
help of identification keys, the literature, and internet sources using a stereomicroscope.boxes
along with naphthalene tablets to protect the samples from predators and other insects
such2.4.
as Relative
ants. AllAbundance
the specimens were tagged, including the information of the collector’s
(RA) Percentage
name, trap number, specimen number, locality, date,
The relative abundance (RA) percentage was and host. by the following formula.
calculated

2.3. Genitalia Extraction and Identification RA = ni/N × 100 (1)

The genital characteristics do not change morphologically and are used widely for
where “ni” is the total number of individuals in the “ith” specie, and “N” is the total
the identification of insect species, because they provide a reliable technique to distinguish
number of noctuid moths in the sampling area [20].
species. The genitals were dissected following the techniques described by Sajjad et al.
[19].2.5.
TheSpatial
abdomen was cut Analysis
and Temporal from the moth’s body using forceps and scissors and dipped
in 10% potassium hydroxide solution for 12 h. The insect abdomen was dissected with the
The Golden software Surfer version 8.02 was used to analyze the spatial abundance.
help of needles under a microscope. The genitalia were washed in distilled water to re-
The spatial contour maps were constructed to determine the distribution pattern of all species
move KOH particles and dipped in 70% ethanol solution to clear the parts of the genitalia.
over space. Surfer generated a grid of values by interpolating the z values. Linear kriging
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 4 of 16

was developed as the interpolation algorithm. The interpolation grid was used to generate
a contour map. The temporal pattern graphs for each species were plotted using Prism
software version 8.4. The data of all traps of each species were pooled by plotting a graph.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

The data for each noctuid moth species abundance were pooled and analyzed by fixed
effect model, i.e., least squares dummy variable model (LSDV) using EViews software
(Markit) version 12 to determine the effect of meteorological factors including temperature
(Tem), humidity (Hum), and rainfall (Rain) on species abundance (SABUN) at significance
level (p < 0.05).

2.6.1. Pooled OLS

We pooled all the data and ran the ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model.

SABUNit = β1i + β2 Temit + β3 Humit + β4 Rainit + εit (2)

where i stands for the ith cross-sectional unit and t for the tth time.

2.6.2. Fixed Effect Model

The Fixed Effect Model for Cross Section (Intercept or Individual) was used to deter-
mine the spatial effect on the distribution of species.

Yit = α1 + α2 T2i + α3 T3i + α4 T4i + α5 T5i + α6 T6i + α7 T7i + α8 T8i + α9 T9i + α10 T10i +
(3)
α11 T11i + α12 T12i + β2 Temit + β3 Humit + β4 Rainit + eit

where T2i = 1 if the observation belongs to cross section 1 (Trap1), T3i = 1 if the
observation belongs to cross section 2 (Trap2), and it continues in the same way for all eleven
cross sections. α1 represented the intercept of Trap1 and α2 , α3 , . . . , and α11 represented
the differential intercept coefficients of the different cross sections.

Fixed Effect Hypothesis Testing

Fgroupseffects = [(R2 fix − R2 pooled )/(N − 1)] ÷ [(1 − R2 LSDV )/(NT − N − k)] (4)

Here, T is the total number of temporal observations, N is the number of cross sections,
and k is the number of regressors in the model.
The statistical difference between noctuid moths captured through light traps from
different types of habitats was determined by performing a one-way analysis of variance
(ANOVA) using Graph prism 9.2.0, and the means were compared by the least significant
difference (LSD) at significance level (p < 0.05).

3. Results
3.1. Abundance of Noctuid Moths
A total of 17,020 specimens of the family Noctuidae were collected by light traps from
the 11 different selected localities in the Multan district. The maximum number of samples
(2636) was captured from Trap 7 followed by Trap 9 (2261), Trap 1 (2248), Trap 11 (2157),
Trap 10 (2094), Trap 8 (1430), Trap 2 (1203), Trap 6 (1056), Trap 5 (740), Trap 4 (616), and Trap
3 (579). During the research, 24 species of family Noctuidae were identified on the basis of
the genitalia. The maximum abundance was recorded of specie S. litura (3171), followed by
H. tripoli (2074), H. Jahangiri (1813), H. armigera (1724), S. exigua (1480), S. furgiperda (1034),
H. stigmosa (721), A. ipsilon (486), Callopistria placodoides (Guenee) (449), Aletia album (Lin-
naeus) (442), Callopistria repleta (Walker) (366), A. cinerea (352), E. insulana (348), M. loreyi
(323), L. oleracea (293), E. vitella (281), Euplexia conducta (279), Mamestra brassicae (276), Helicov-
erpa platigera (Wallengren) (240), Leucania venalba (Moore) (237), Ctenopulsia albostriata (Bremer)
(203), Aletia decisissima (Walker) (185), Diarsia hoenei (160), and C. furthatai (83). (Table 2).
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 5 of 16

Table 2. The collective rank list and abundance of all species from all traps in the region of Multan, Punjab-Pakistan.

Rank Species Name Relative

Abundance Abundance T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11
(%)
1 S. litura 3171 18.6% 595 187 43 72 80 84 401 262 522 574 351
2 H. Tripoli 2074 12.2% 325 212 17 26 69 74 253 188 322 289 299
3 H. jahangiri 1813 10.6% 484 219 19 59 42 0 292 0 464 234 0
4 H. armigera 1724 10.1% 187 98 81 87 48 127 221 189 197 246 243
5 S. exigua 1480 8.7% 267 93 59 66 60 151 297 0 286 201 0
6 S. furgiperda 1034 6.1% 24 121 11 28 164 212 414 0 0 0 60
7 H. stigmosa 721 4.2% 96 104 0 15 0 0 112 68 72 132 122
8 A. ipsilon 486 2.8% 17 18 0 4 31 0 61 118 53 93 91
9 C. placodoides 449 2.6% 77 39 74 49 25 0 67 0 0 0 118
10 A. album 442 2.6% 42 11 41 25 32 65 0 109 0 0 117
11 C. replete 366 2.1% 37 28 52 21 48 27 80 0 0 0 73
12 A. cinerea 352 2.1% 15 19 43 15 29 0 47 110 0 28 46
13 E. insulana 348 2% 21 24 12 9 15 22 73 0 74 98 0
14 M. loreyi 323 1.9% 0 0 10 15 21 0 26 0 56 93 102
15 L. oleracea 293 1.7% 8 0 34 31 0 45 0 59 0 0 116
16 E. vitella 281 1.6% 24 19 18 19 24 29 67 0 47 34 0
17 E. conducta 279 1.6% 0 0 16 24 0 55 0 65 63 56 0
18 M. brassicae 276 1.6% 5 0 11 9 0 0 0 78 0 0 173
19 H. platigera 240 1.4% 24 11 16 10 0 12 80 0 0 0 87
20 L. venalba 237 1.4% 0 0 22 32 0 48 0 85 50 0 0
21 C. albostriata 203 1.2% 0 0 0 0 0 50 56 0 0 0 97
22 A. decisissima 185 1.1% 0 0 0 0 30 0 47 46 0 0 62
23 D. hoenei 160 0.9% 0 0 0 0 22 30 0 53 55 0 0
24 C. furthatai 83 0.5% 0 0 0 0 0 25 42 0 0 16 0
Total Individuals N = 17020 ΣN = 100% N1 = 2248 N2 = 1203 N3 = 579 N4 = 616 N5 = 740 N6 = 1056 N7 = 2636 N8 = 1430 N9 = 2261 N10 = 2094 N11 = 2157
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 6 of 16

3.2. Effect of Meteorological Factors on Species Abundance

The factors, i.e., temperature, humidity, and rainfall had a significant effect on all
species captured. The temperature and humidity showed a positive correlation, while the
humidity negatively correlated with all described species abundance. The F-test value
showed the overall significance of these meteorological factors (Table 3).

Table 3. The effect of meteorological factors on the species distribution. Fixed effect model (LSDV) for
species abundance data. “*” Probability value significant at p < 0.05, SE = Standard error of regression.

Temperature (◦ C) Humidity (%) Rainfall (mm) Pooled OLS

Species SE
Coefficient p Value Coefficient p Value Coefficient p Value (F-Test) Value

H. stigmosa 1.08 * <0.0001 0.90 * <0.0001 −6.14 * <0.0001 6.39 9.28× 1014
H. trifoli 3.11 * <0.0001 2.40 * <0.0001 −16.68 * <0.0001 12.12 1.40 × 1023
H. jahangiri 2.43 * <0.0001 1.70 * <0.0001 −13.18 * <0.0001 14.27 4.67 × 1021
S. litura 4.37 * <0.0001 3.12 * <0.0001 −22.38 * <0.0001 17.23 3.51× 1026
S. exigua 2.13 * <0.0001 1.47 * <0.0001 −11.21 * <0.0001 9.83 3.78× 1022
H. armigera 2.83 * <0.0001 2.17 * <0.0001 −14.69 * <0.0001 8.53 6.22× 1029
H. platigera 0.48 * <0.0001 0.46 * <0.0001 −2.78 * <0.0001 3.50 1.14× 1012
C. placodoides 1.02 * <0.0001 0.96 * <0.0001 −6.24 * <0.0001 5.74 3.31× 1013
C. repleta 0.85 * <0.0001 0.78 * <0.0001 −4.92 * <0.0001 3.86 1.55 × 1017
A. ipsilon 0.95 * <0.0001 0.92 * <0.0001 −5.40 * <0.0001 5.31 1.39 × 1014
A. cinerea 0.78 * <0.0001 0.82 * <0.0001 −4.57 * <0.0001 3.98 1.77 × 1016
A. album 1.03 * <0.0001 1.01 * <0.0001 −5.83 * <0.0001 5.46 3.97 × 1015
A. decisissima 0.32 * <0.0001 0.26 * <0.0001 −1.73 * <0.0001 2.70 2.72 × 1011
E. insulana 0.77 * <0.0001 0.79 * <0.0001 −4.20 * <0.0001 4.09 2.15 × 1016
E. vitelli 0.64 * <0.0001 0.67 * <0.0001 −3.33 * <0.0001 3.07 1.56 × 1016
C. furithatai 0.17 * <0.0001 0.18 * <0.0001 0.90 * 0.0018 1.93 3.38 × 1007
L. oleracea 0.58 * <0.0001 0.52 * <0.0001 −2.84 * <0.0001 4.49 7.14 × 1011
E. conducta 0.57 * <0.0001 0.56 * <0.0001 −2.86 * <0.0001 3.70 1.48 × 1012
L. venalba 0.51 * <0.0001 0.50 * <0.0001 −2.67 * <0.0001 3.72 3.35 × 1011
D. hoenei 0.32 * <0.0001 0.32 * <0.0001 −1.79 * <0.0001 2.97 2.05 × 1008
C. albostriata 0.39 * <0.0001 0.37 * <0.0001 −2.12 * 0.0002 3.77 2.33 × 1010
M. loreyi 0.67 * <0.0001 0.66 * <0.0001 −3.83 * <0.0001 4.16 1.47 × 1014
M. brassicae 0.52 * <0.0001 0.53 * <0.0001 −2.99 * 0.0003 5.54 2.62 × 1011
S. furgiperda 0.84 * <0.0001 0.51 * 0.0036 −3.91 * 0.0007 7.64 9.35 × 1025

3.3. Temporal Distribution

The maximum abundance (199) of H. stigmosa was recorded in September 2020 and
declined to zero in January 2021. The species H. trifoli was observed at its maximum (585)
in September 2020 and declined to zero in January and February 2021; then, it started to
increase from March with a gradual increase in temperature. The maximum abundance
of H. jahangiri (460) and S. litura (826) was recorded in September 2020 and declined to
zero in January and February 2021. The population of both species increased gradually
with the temperature increase from February to June 2021. The maximum abundance of
H. armigera (493) and H. punctigera (93) was recorded in September 2020 and declined to
zero in January and February 2021. The population of both species increased gradually
with the temperature increase from February to June 2021. The maximum abundance of
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 7 of 16

Agriculture 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 17

C. repleta (161) was recorded in September 2020 and declined to zero in January and February
2021. The specie C. placodoides was recorded at its maximum (194) in September 2020 and
and declined to zero in January, February, March, and April 2021. The maximum abun-
declined to zero in January, February, March, and April 2021. The maximum abundance of
dance of A. ipsilon (195) was recorded in September 2020 and declined to zero in January,
A. ipsilon (195) was recorded in September 2020 and declined to zero in January, February,
February, and March 2021. The specie A. cinerea was recorded at its maximum (164) in
and March 2021. The specie A. cinerea was recorded at its maximum (164) in September
September 2020 and declined to zero in February, March, and April 2021. The maximum
2020 and declined to zero in February, March, and April 2021. The maximum abundance
abundance of A. album (206) and E. insulana (165) was recorded in September 2020 and
of A. album (206) and E. insulana (165) was recorded in September 2020 and declined to
declined to zero in January, February, and March 2021. The maximum abundance of A.
zero in January, February, and March 2021. The maximum abundance of A. decisissima (59)
decisissima (59) and E. vitella (133) was recorded in September 2020, and A. decisissima de-
and E. vitella (133) was recorded in September 2020, and A. decisissima declined to zero in
clined to zero in January and February 2021, while E. vitella remained absent from January
January and February 2021, while E. vitella remained absent from January to April 2021.
to April
The maximum2021. abundance
The maximum of L. abundance
oleracea (112)ofandL. oleracea
S. exigua(112)
(380)andwasS.recorded
exigua (380) was rec-
in September
ordedand
2020, in September 2020, andtoL.zero
L. oleracea declined oleracea declined
in January to February
and zero in January and February
2021, while S. exigua2021,
was
while S. exigua was recorded at zero in January. The specie C. furthatai
recorded at zero in January. The specie C. furthatai was recorded at its maximum (of 34) was recorded at its
in
maximum (of
September 202034)andin September
declined to2020 zeroand declined toJanuary,
in December, zero in December,
February, January, February,
March, April, and
March,
May April,
2021. Theand MayE.2021.
specie The specie
conducta E. conducta
was recorded was
at its recorded(113)
maximum at itsin
maximum
September (113)
2020in
September 2020 and declined to zero in January, February,
and declined to zero in January, February, and March 2021. The maximum abundance and March 2021. The maxi-
mum
of abundance
M. brassicae (107) M. brassicae
of and M. loreyi(107)
(134)and
was M.recorded
loreyi (134) was recorded
in September 2020in and
September
declined 2020
to
and declined to zero from January to March 2021. The specie
zero from January to March 2021. The specie S. furgiperda showed maximum abundance S. furgiperda showed maxi-
mumin
(243) abundance
September (243)
2020 in and
September
declined 2020to and
zerodeclined to zero
in January 2021. in The
January 2021.
specie C. The specie
albostriata
C. albostriata showed maximum abundance (77) in September
showed maximum abundance (77) in September 2020 and declined to zero from January 2020 and declined to zero
to
from January to March 2021. The maximum abundance of L.
March 2021. The maximum abundance of L. venalba (113) and D. hoenei (63) was recordedvenalba (113) and D. hoenei
(63)
in was recorded
September 2020,in September
and 2020, and
the abundance of D.the abundance
hoenei declined D.zero
of to hoenei
in declined to zero in
January, February,
January,
March, andFebruary,
April 2021.March,
The and April 2021.
abundance The abundance
of L venalba of L venalba
was not recorded fromwas not recorded
December 2020
from
to December
March 2020 to
2021 (Figure 2).March 2021 (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Cont.
Agriculture 2022, 12,
Agriculture 2022, 12, x2003
FOR PEER REVIEW 9 8ofof 17
16

Figure 2. Cont.
Agriculture 2022,
Agriculture 12, 2003
2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 109 of 17
of 16

Figure 2.
Figure 2. Temporal
Temporal distribution
distribution patterns
patterns of S. litura,
of S. litura, H.
H. tripoli,
tripoli, H.
H. Jahangiri,
Jahangiri, H. armigera, S.
H. armigera, S. exigua,
exigua, S.
S.
furgiperda, H.
furgiperda, H. stigmosa,
stigmosa, A.A.ipsilon,
ipsilon,C.
C.placodoides,
placodoides,A.A.album,
album,C.C.repleta,
repleta,A.A.cinerea,
cinerea,
E.E. insulana,
insulana, M.M. loreyi,
loreyi, L.
L. oleracea, E. vitella, E. conducta, M. brassicae, H. platigera, L. venalba, C. albostriata, A. decisissima,
oleracea, E. vitella, E. conducta, M. brassicae, H. platigera, L. venalba, C. albostriata, A. decisissima, D. hoenei, D.
hoenei,
and and C. furthatai
C. furthatai recorded recorded every from
every month month Julyfrom
2020July 2020 2021
to June to June 2021 in different
in different localitieslocalities
of Multan. of
Multan. Average temperature, humidity, and rainfall were
Average temperature, humidity, and rainfall were measured for each month.measured for each month.

3.4. Spatial
3.4. Spatial Distribution
Distribution
The contour
The contour maps
mapsinterpolated
interpolatedthe theexpected
expectedpopulation
populationabundance
abundance data
data at at individ-
individual
ual locations
locations from from an entire
an entire area.
area. In In
thethe maps,contour
maps, contourlines
lineswere
wereused
usedtoto differentiate
differentiate the
the
abundance values. The area between two contour lines represented the species abun-
abundance values. The area between two contour lines represented the species abundance.
dance.
All the All the species
species showedshowed aggregation
aggregation in areasin
ofareas
their of their favorite
favorite hostand
host plants plants and dis-
dispersal in
persalareas
other in other areas3).(Figure 3).
(Figure
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 10 of 16
Agriculture 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

71.6
71.6

71.58
71.58

71.56
71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude
71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44
71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(a) (b)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude
71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(c) (d)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude
Longitude

71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(e) (f)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude

71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(g) (h)

Figure 3. Cont.
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 11 of 16
Agriculture 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54

Longitude
Longitude

71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(i) (j)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude
71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46
71.46

71.44
71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26
Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(k) (l)
71.6

71.6

71.58

71.58

71.56

71.56

71.54

71.54
Longitude

71.52
Longitude

71.52

71.5

71.5

71.48

71.48

71.46

71.46

71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26
71.44
Latitude 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(m) (n)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude
Longitude

71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(o) (p)

Figure 3. Cont.
Agriculture 2022,
Agriculture 12, x2003
2022, 12, FOR PEER REVIEW 1312ofof17
16

71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude
71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(q) (r)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude
71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(s) (t)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude

71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(u) (v)
71.6 71.6

71.58 71.58

71.56 71.56

71.54 71.54
Longitude

Longitude

71.52 71.52

71.5 71.5

71.48 71.48

71.46 71.46

71.44 71.44
30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26 30.16 30.18 30.2 30.22 30.24 30.26

Latitude Latitude
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08

(w) (x)
Figure
Figure 3.3. Spatial
Spatialcontour
contourmaps
mapsof ofH.
H.stigmosa (a),H.
stigmosa(a), H.tripoli (b),H.
tripoli(b), H.Jahangiri (c),S.
Jahangiri(c), S.litura (d),S.
litura (d), S. exigua
exigua
(e), H. armigera (f), H. platigera (g), C. placodoides (h), C. repleta (i), A. ipsilon (j), A. cinerea (k), A. album
(e), H. armigera (f), H. platigera (g), C. placodoides (h), C. repleta (i), A. ipsilon (j), A. cinerea (k), A. album
(l), A. decisissima (m), E. insulana (n), E. vitella (o), C. furthatai (p), L. oleracea (q), E. conducta (r), L.
(l), A. decisissima (m), E. insulana (n), E. vitella (o), C. furthatai (p), L. oleracea (q), E. conducta (r), L.
venalba (s), D. hoenei (t), C. albostriata (u), M. loreyi (v), M. brassicae (w), and S. furgiperda (x).
venalba (s), D. hoenei (t), C. albostriata (u), M. loreyi (v), M. brassicae (w), and S. furgiperda (x).

3.5. Noctuid Moth Abundance from Different Habitats

Recorded noctuid moth populations from different habitats showed a significant
(p < 0.05) difference. The maximum abundance was recorded from crop areas 5 km away
ure 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17

3.5. Noctuid Moth Abundance from Different Habitats

Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 13 of 16

Recorded noctuid moth populations from different habitats showed a significant (p

< 0.05) difference. The maximum abundance was recorded from crop areas 5 km away
from
from urban areas, urban areas,
followed followed
by crop by crop
areas near theareas
urbannear
area.theThe
urban area. The
minimum minimum population of
population
insects was found in forested areas
of insects was found in forested areas (Figure 4). (Figure 4).

2500
Noctuuid moths abundance

Light Trap Area

2000
Cr 1 = Trap 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
1500 Cr 2 = Trap 1, 2, 6
Cr 3 = Trap 3, 4, 5
1000

500

0
Cr 1 Cr 2 Cr 3
Crop area away from Crop area near the Forest area
urban area urban area

Figure 4. NoctuidFigure
moth 4.abundance in different
Noctuid moth type of
abundance habitats in
in different Multan.
type Different
of habitats letters indicate
in Multan. Different letters indicate
significant differences at (p <differences
significant 0.05). at (p < 0.05).

4. Discussion 4. Discussion
This study provides an effective pipeline for a large-scale sampling of noctuid moths
This study provides an effective pipeline for a large-scale sampling of noctuid moths
and spatial and temporal fluctuations in abundance of field sampling using a light trap.
and spatial and temporal fluctuations in abundance of field sampling using a light trap.
The light traps proved to be successful at collecting a large number of nocturnal moths
The light traps proved to be successful at collecting a large number of nocturnal moths
and evaluating the spatiotemporal abundance of different species of the family Noctuidae
and evaluating the spatiotemporal abundance of different species of the family Noctuidae
that cause damage to economically important crops [12]. The climatological factors such as
that cause damage to economically important crops [12]. The climatological factors such
temperature and humidity had a significantly positive correlation, while rainfall indicated
as temperature and humidity had a significantly positive correlation, while rainfall indi-
a significantly negative correlation, with the species composition. The maximum species
cated a significantly negative correlation, with the species composition. The maximum
abundance was recorded in cropping areas as compared to woodland areas. Overall, we
species abundance was recorded in cropping areas as compared to woodland areas. Over-
propose that our methodological channel be extensively applied in ecological studies, to im-
all, we propose that our methodological channel be extensively applied in ecological stud-
prove our understanding of the trends in nocturnal moth communities and to complement
ies, to improvestudies
our understanding of the trendsdistribution
based on spatiotemporal in nocturnal moth communities
patterns, and to light traps that
through the yellow
complement studies based on spatiotemporal distribution patterns, through the yellow
were so efficient in capturing nocturnal moths. To enhance the potential of this pipeline
light traps thatinwere so efficient
ecological in capturing
studies, efforts arenocturnal
needed tomoths.
test its To enhance the
effectiveness and potential
potential biases across
of this pipeline habitat
in ecological
types. studies, efforts are needed to test its effectiveness and poten-
tial biases across habitat types.
The maximum abundance of noctuid moths was observed from Trap 7, 9, 1,11, and 10
The maximum abundance
installed in complexof noctuid
cropping moths wasofobserved
habitats from Trap
cotton, maize, wheat,7, 9, 1,11,
rice, andand
vegetables. Previ-
10 installed in ous
complex cropping habitats of cotton, maize, wheat, rice, and vegetables.
studies have described that insect abundance is influenced by landscape complexity
Previous studies andhave
hostdescribed
diversity.that
Theinsect
maximum abundance is influenced
abundance by landscape
of H. armigera com- from complex
was recorded
plexity and host diversity.
crop systemsThe maximum
compared withabundance H. armigera
simple cropofsystems [12]. was recorded from
complex crop systems Thecompared
temporal andwithspatial
simplepatterns
crop systems
of these[12].
24 species belonging to the family Noctuidae
The temporal and spatial patterns of these 24 species
have been studied from different localities within belonging to the family
the Multan district.Noctu-
Our results indicated
idae have beenthat studied
the meteorological factors of temperature, humidity, andOur
from different localities within the Multan district. results
rainfall had a significant
indicated that the meteorological
effect on the species’factors of temperature,
population dynamics.humidity,
Temperature and rainfall had a sig-
and humidity showed a positive
nificant effect on the species’
correlation, population
while dynamics.
rainfall was negativelyTemperature
correlatedand withhumidity showed a Similar results
species abundance.
positive correlation,
were while rainfall
described was negatively
previously, correlated with
as meteorological factors species abundance.
significantly Sim- the population
influence
ilar results weredynamics
describedofpreviously, as meteorological
noctuid species factors
[21]. The resulting significantly
map provided an influence
extremelytheeffective aid for
population dynamics of noctuid species [21]. The resulting map provided an extremely
visualizing the spatial distribution of the target population. All the species showed different
spatial distribution patterns that might be due to the favorable host plant distribution or
latitudinal differences. Previous studies have recorded that the population abundance
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 14 of 16

of arthropods is affected by the agricultural landscape, latitude, longitude, and climatic

factors [22].
Understanding the temporal behavior of noctuid moths is fundamental for developing
management programs to control these pests. It can provide important information to
demonstrate when and where noctuid pests should be controlled to elude economic losses
by formulating timely control measures. In the present study, the maximum population
of nocturnal moths occurred in moth of September, while January and February were less
favorable. Previous studies have described that the maximum population was observed
in early spring in March and April, while the summer and winter were less favorable.
These observations suggest that the temporal fluctuation of moth populations is related to
different climatic variables, such as temperature, rainfall, and relative humidity [23].
Information on the spatial dispersal is the initial step in the decision-making process
to manage the diverse insect pests with an integrated pest management strategy when
mandatory in specific crop or field areas. In addition to this study, future research should
be conducted for other damaging pests in the agroecosystem, as well as monitoring the
population of these pests in other host plants and native vegetation, aiming to understand
the farmscape ecology of destructive pests in time and space, and improving approaches to
the population control of phytophagous noctuid pests. In the present study, all the species
showed aggregation in areas of their favorable host plants and dispersal in other areas. This
study was in agreement with Xiong et al. [24], who reported a distribution contour map
that indicated an aggregation of P. xylostella in the agricultural landscape, mostly in the area
with the availability of food, especially cruciferous vegetables, and the dispersal pattern of
P. xylostella population dynamics was associated with the shortage of favorable food.
The maximum abundance of the collected species was recorded in the crop areas that
were away from urban areas, as compared to the crop areas that were near urban areas. In
contrast, the minimum population abundance was recorded in the forest areas. In seminat-
ural habitats, the population abundance of pests was low due to natural enemies [13]. The
artificial lighting in urban areas has conspicuous ecological consequences on the nocturnal
moths, leading to a lower moth population [24].
Significant attention in recent years has been paid to the impact of agroecosystem land
on integrated pest management [25–27]. The distribution of Spodoptera litura in our study
was increased in the area of agricultural and horticultural crops, especially the cultivation
of cotton crops. S. litura captures were highly influenced by the cropping systems in the
locality, and the spatial trend of dispersion was consistent with the cotton field. In forest
ecosystems, S. litura showed a distinctive spatial distribution pattern among patches, and
the layout of the host plant patches is one of the drivers that affects this distribution pattern,
Sciarretta [28].

5. Conclusions
This study characterized the temporal dynamics and spatial distribution of S. litura, H.
tripoli, H. Jahangiri, H. armigera, S. exigua, S. furgiperda, H. stigmosa, A. ipsilon, C. placodoides,
A. album, C. repleta, A. cinerea, E. insulana, M. loreyi, L. oleracea, E. vitella, E. conducta, M.
brassicae, H. platigera, L. venalba, C. albostriata, A. decisissima, D. hoenei, and C. furthatai
in an agricultural landscape and demonstrated that the climatic factors of temperature,
humidity, and rainfall had a strong impact on the distribution of species. The results
advance our understanding of the temporal and spatial distribution of the noctuid species
on a diversified fauna in the Multan district that will help forecast the population dynamics
and implement an integrated pest management program.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Z.M.S. and A.A.; methodology, Z.M.S.; software, A.A.
and N.A validation, S.K.A., P.A. and A.A.A.; formal analysis, Z.M.S., A.A. and N.A.; investigation,
Z.H.; resources, Z.M.S., A.A. and N.B.J.; data curation, Z.M.S., A.A. and F.Z.; writing—original draft
preparation, Z.M.S. and N.A; writing—review and editing, Z.M.S., N.A., S.K.A., P.A., A.A.A., F.Z. and
N.B.J.; visualization, P.A., A.A.A., F.Z. and N.B.J.; supervision, Z.M.S.; project administration, Z.M.S.;
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 15 of 16

funding acquisition, S.K.A. and F.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the
manuscript.
Funding: The author extends his appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid
University for funding this work through the General Research Project under Grant number (RGP.
1/289/43).
Data Availability Statement: The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available
from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors disclose no conflicts of interest of any kind associated with
this manuscript.

References
1. Resh, V.H.; Cardé, R.T. (Eds.) Encyclopedia of Insects; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2009; pp. 501–502.
2. Sivasankaran, K.; Ignacimuthu, S.; Paulraj, M.G.; Prabakaran, S. A checklist of Noctuidae (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Noctuoidea) of
India. Rec. Zool. Surv. India 2011, 111, 79–101. [CrossRef]
3. Maruthadurai, R.; Ramesh, R. Occurrence, damage pattern and biology of fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (JE smith)
(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on fodder crops and green amaranth in Goa, India. Phytoparasitica 2020, 48, 15–23. [CrossRef]
4. Stacke, R.F.; Arnemann, J.A.; Rogers, J.; Stacke, R.S.; Strahl, T.T.; Perini, C.R.; Dossin, M.F.; Pozebon, H.; De-Arruda-Cavallin, L.;
Guedes, J.V. Damage assessment of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in soybean reproductive stages. Crop Protect.
2018, 112, 10–17. [CrossRef]
5. Yang, Xi.; Song, Yi.; Sun, Xi.; Shen, Xi.; Wu, Qi.; Zhang, Ha.; Zhang, Da.; Zhao, Sh.; Liang, Ge.; Wu, Ko. Population occurrence of
the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in the winter season of China. J. Integr. Agric. 2021, 20,
772–782. [CrossRef]
6. Luttrell, R.G.; Wan, L.; Knighten, K. Variation in susceptibility of noctuid (Lepidoptera) larvae attacking cotton and soybean to
purified endotoxin proteins and commercial formulations of Bacillus thuringiensis. J. Econ. Entomol. 1999, 92, 21–32. [CrossRef]
7. Kalleshwaraswamy, C.; Asokan, R.; Mahadevaswamy, H.; Sharanabasappa, C. First record of invasive fall armyworm, Spodoptera
frugiperda (JE Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on rice (Oryza sativa) from India. J. Entomol. Zool. 2019, 7, 332–337.
8. Paula-Moraes, S.V.; Silva, F.D.A.; Specht, A.; Rapisarda, C.; Cocuzza, G.E.M. Options and challenges for pest control in intensive
cropping systems in tropical regions. J. Integr. Pest Manag. Tropical. 2017, 1, 18–32.
9. Allstadt, A.J.; Liebhold, A.M.; Johnson, D.M.; Davis, R.E.; Haynes, K.J. Temporal variation in the synchrony of weather and its
consequences for spatiotemporal population dynamics. Ecology 2015, 96, 2935–2946. [CrossRef]
10. Colinet, H.; Sinclair, B.J.; Vernon, P.; Renault, D. Insects in fluctuating thermal environments. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2015, 60,
123–140. [CrossRef]
11. Robinet, C.; Roques, A. Direct impacts of recent climate warming on insect populations. Integer. Zool. 2010, 5, 132–142. [CrossRef]
12. Lu, Z.Z.; Baker, G. Spatial and temporal dynamics of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) in contrasting agricultural
landscapes in northwestern China. Int. J. Pest Manag. 2013, 59, 25–34. [CrossRef]
13. Bianchi, F.J.; Booij, C.; Tscharntke, T. Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes: A review on landscape composition,
biodiversity and natural pest control. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2006, 273, 1715–1727. [CrossRef]
14. Vinatier, F.; Tixier, P.; Duyck, P.F.; Lescourret, F. Factors and mechanisms explaining spatial heterogeneity: A review of methods
for insect populations. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2011, 2, 11–22. [CrossRef]
15. Da-Silva, R.S.; Kumar, L.; Shabani, F.; Da Silva, E.M.; da Silva Galdino, T.V.; Picanço, M.C. Spatio-temporal dynamic climate
model for Neoleucinodes elegantalis using CLIMEX. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2017, 61, 785–795. [CrossRef]
16. Milonas, P.; Gogou, C.; Papadopoulou, A.; Fountas, S.; Liakos, V.; Papadopoulos, N.T. Spatio-temporal distribution of Helicoverpa
armigera (Hubner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in a cotton
production area. Neo. Entomol. 2016, 45, 240–251. [CrossRef]
17. Hernandez-Mendoza, J.L.; López-Barbosa, E.C.; Garza-González, E.; Mayek-Perez, N. Spatial distribution of Spodoptera
frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in maize landraces grown in Colima, México. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2008, 28, 126–129.
[CrossRef]
18. Merkl, M.E.; Pfrilllmcr, T.R. Light·trap investigations at Stoncville. J. Econ. Entomol. 1995, 48, 740–743. [CrossRef]
19. Sajjad, M.; Sarwar, Z.M.; Binyameen, M.; Qasim, M.; Bashir, M.H. A New Species of Genus Agrotis Ochsenheimer (Lepidoptera:
Noctuidae) in Pakistan. J. Anim. Plant Sci. 2020, 30, 685–692.
20. Khan, M.R.; Rafi, M.A.; Nazir, N.; Khan, M.R.; Khan, I.A.; Hayat, A.; Ghaffar, A.; Rahim, J.; Perveen, F. Biodiversity of butterflies
from poonch division of Azad Kashmir, Pakistan. J. Agric. Technol. 2014, 10, 885–898.
21. Fonseca-Medrano, M.; Specht, A.; Silva, F.A.M.; Otanásio, P.N.; Malaquias, J.V. The population dynamics of three polyphagous
owlet moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and the influence of meteorological factors and ENSO on them. Rev. Bras. Entomol. 2020,
63, 308–315. [CrossRef]
22. Santos, S.R.D.; Specht, A.; Carneiro, E.; Casagrande, M.M. The influence of agricultural occupation and climate on the spatial
distribution of Plusiinae (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on a latitudinal gradient in Brazil. Rev. Bras. Entomol. 2021, 65. [CrossRef]
Agriculture 2022, 12, 2003 16 of 16

23. Jian-Yu, L.; Yan-Ting, C.; Meng-Zhu, S.; Jian-Wei, L.; Rui-Bin, X.; Gabor, P.; Shen, M. Spatio-temporal distribution patterns of
Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) in a fine-scale agricultural landscape based on geostatistical analysis. Sci. Rep. 2021,
11, 13622.
24. Xiong, L.G.; Wu, Q.J.; Wang, S.L.; Xu, B.Y.; Zhu, G.R.; Zhang, Y.J. Biological characteristic of overwintering in the diamondback
moth, Plutella xylostella. Plant Prot. 2010, 36, 90–93.
25. Frank, K.D.; Rich, C.; Longcore, T. Effects of artificial night lighting on moths. In Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting;
Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; pp. 305–344.
26. Zhao, Z.H.; Hui, C.; He, D.H.; Ge, F. Effects of position within wheat field and adjacent habitats on the density and diversity of
cereal aphids and their natural enemies. Biocontrol 2013, 58, 765–776. [CrossRef]
27. Sciarretta, A.; Trematerra, P. Geostatistical tools for the study of insect spatial distribution: Practical implications in the integrated
management of orchard and vineyard pests. Plant Prot. Sci. 2014, 50, 97–110. [CrossRef]
28. Furlong, M.J.; Wright, D.J.; Dosdall, L.M. Diamondback moth ecology and management: Problems, progress, and prospects.
Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013, 58, 517–541. [CrossRef]