Perspectives of using vibrational communication data to develop safe methods for insect population size control

The transition to organic farming requires the development of new methods of population pest control without using insecticides. Accumulating evidence of insect vibrational communication indicate that the use of natural and modified signals pests may impede their successful communication on the plant, thereby reducing their population. Therefore, this study was conducted during 20 August to 16 October 2020 at Kharkevich Institute and discusses the effectiveness of using impetuses on the example widespread species Pentatoma rufipes which can damage large range of plants. Artificial models of stimuli, which were based on calling songs and rival signals of P. rufipes changed the behavior of female insects authentically in compared with control variant. The differences between duration of latent periods and number of successful approaches to the source of stimuli were discovered. There were shown, that artificial stimuli were attractive for females, wherein the difference of preferences between calling song and rival signals were more likely qualitative, i.e., stimuli were attractive equally. This fact explains by the way that agonistic behavior of males was directed only on the representatives of the same gender, not on females. We suppose that these signals can be used to increase efficiency of traditional methods of pest control, for example for attract insects to glue or pheromone traps. Both calling song (N = 16) and rival (N = 15) signals were used as stimuli. Two main behavioral responses of females to the stimulus were assessed-the latency period from the beginning of the stimulus application to the start of active movement of the female, % of successful approaches to the stimulus source. Control-no stimulus (N=15). The latency periods with and without stimulation differed significantly. The percentage of positive responses to stimuli was significantly higher than in the control (U-Mann-Whitney test; * p <0.05). On the contrary, the latency period before the onset of activity in the absence of a stimulus was significantly longer (Mann-Whitney U-test; p