In Vitro Predation Efficiency of Ladybird Beetles as a Biocontrol Agent on Aphids Available in Bangladesh Coast

In Vitro Predation Efficiency of Ladybird Beetles as a Biocontrol Agent on Aphids Available in Bangladesh Coast | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article In Vitro Predation Efficiency of Ladybird Beetles as a Biocontrol Agent on Aphids Available in Bangladesh Coast Most Shirina Akter, Md. Habibur Rahman, Mohammad Atikur Rahman, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7793888/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted 7 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Aphids ( Aphis spp. ) are significant pests in agriculture, and the use of ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae) as biological control agents offers a sustainable alternative to chemical pesticides. However, their predation efficiency in coastal agroecosystems remains underexplored. This study evaluated the predation efficiency of three coccinellid species- Coccinella transversalis , Menochilus sexmaculatus , and Cheilomenes sanguinea against Aphis craccivora and Aphis gossypii under controlled laboratory conditions (21 ± 4°C; 67 ± 1% RH). Larvae were individually placed in Petri dishes with three replicates per species, and aphid consumption was recorded across all larval stages and adult beetles. Menochilus sexmaculatus exhibited rapid development and consumed comparable aphid numbers in a shorter period (consumed 37.7 ± 2.0 A. craccivora and 41.8 ± 2.0 A. gossypii by 4th instar of beetle on day 8), indicating high early-stage efficiency. C. sanguinea consumed fewer aphids overall (consumed 19.7 ± 1.3 A. craccivora , 18.0 ± 1.7 A. gossypii by 4th instar of beetle on day 15), but showed consistent feeding across stages, suggesting potential for sustained control. C. transversalis demonstrated the highest total consumption (consumed 55.0 ± 18.5 A. craccivora , 46.0 ± 1.7 A. gossypii by 4th instar of beetle on days 13–14), supporting its role as a long-term biocontrol agent. These results highlight the species-specific predation efficiencies of coccinellids and support their integration into ecologically based pest management programs. Field validation is recommended to assess performance under variable coastal conditions. Aphid Biological control predation efficiency Coccinella transversalis Menochilus sexmaculatus Cheilomenes sanguinea Aphis craccivora Aphis gossypii Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Introduction Aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae) are globally significant and destructive insect pests in temperate and subtropical agroecosystems, causing direct damage through sap-feeding and indirectly by transmitting plant viruses (Nisa et al. 2024). Their parthenogenetic reproduction enables rapid population growth under favourable conditions (Solangi et al. 2007; Ahmad et al. 2024), whereas phloem feeding results in chlorosis, stunted growth, reduced photosynthesis, and the drop of flowers or fruits (Ali & Rizvi 2011; Macedo et al. 2003). Additionally, honeydew excretion by aphids fosters sooty mould, lowering plant productivity and marketability (Holloway et al. 1991; Chowdhury et al. 2008a), and their role as vectors of mosaic and leaf roll viruses poses ongoing threats to crop health and food security (Smit and Boyko 2006; Salman et al. 2014; Bajracharya et al. 2023). In Bangladesh, aphids such as Aphis craccivora and Aphis gossypii cause considerable damage to major vegetable crops like country bean and brinjal, posing a threat to rural livelihoods and smallholder farming systems (Rahman et al. 2023). Severe infestations of Aphis craccivora can cause substantial damage to bean plants from the seedling to pod-bearing stages, often leading to complete failure in flowering and fruiting, with yield losses ranging from 20–40% (Sharmin et al. 2021; Ahmed et al. 2019; Salman et al. 2014; Chowdhury et al. 2008a). Similarly, Aphis gossypii can markedly reduce the yield and quality of brinjal, especially during peak infestations in February (Shakeel et al. 2014). As chemical insecticides provide immediate results (Katsarou 2005), they are the primary pest management strategy in Bangladesh (Chowdhury et al. 2008b). Overreliance on pesticides and their indiscriminate use have raised serious concerns, including environmental pollution, the development of pest resistance, and the decline of beneficial arthropods such as natural enemies of aphids (Solangi et al. 2007; Ashraf et al. 2010). Moreover, many farmers apply these chemicals without proper safety measures or technical guidance, increasing risks to human health and ecosystems (Shakeel et al. 2014). These challenges underscore the need for more sustainable pest control approaches. Biological control, a key component of integrated pest management (IPM), offers an ecologically sound alternative to synthetic insecticides (Sheela & Shinde 2019; De Clercq et al. 2011; Bellows 2001). Among biological agents, ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae) are considered the primary natural predators (Salman et al., 2014) and the most effective and well-studied aphid enemies (Miao et al. 2007; Rondoni et al. 2020), due to their strong predatory efficiency, foraging behaviour, and reproductive capacity (Ali & Rizvi 2007; Ahmad et al. 2024). Both larvae and adults feed on aphids and other soft-bodied pests, including whiteflies, psyllids, mealybugs, and scale insects (Solangi et al. 2007; Ali & Rizvi 2007). However, the predation efficiency and reproductive performance of coccinellids is influenced by multiple factors, including prey species, prey availability, quality of their prey and host plants, host plant characteristics, predator developmental stage, and environmental conditions (Ali et al. 2009; Rakhshan and Ahmad 2018; Saleem et al. 2019; Evans 2000). Predators regulate prey not only by direct consumption but also indirectly by altering prey behaviour and physiology in ways that affect reproduction and survival (Kansman et al. 2023; Norris et al. 2023). The success of biological control programs, however, depends on understanding the predator's biology, feeding behaviour, and ecological adaptability (Khan and Wan 2015; Priyadarshani et al. 2016; Sarwar and Saqib 2010). Efficient predation rates measured in the laboratory correspond closely to field consumption patterns (Finlayson et al. 2010). Several studies have explored the predatory efficiency of coccinellids feeding on aphid species (Rain et al. 2016; Mishra et al. 2011, 2012; Kumar et al. 2013; Wu et al., 2023). Despite the extensive literature on bean aphids and brinjal aphids, only a few studies have examined the predation efficiency of different ladybird beetle species on these aphids in the coastal region of Bangladesh. Therefore, this study aims to assess the predation efficiency of three natural predators (both adult and grub) Coccinella transversalis, Menochilus sexmaculatus , and Cycloneda sanguinea —against Aphis craccivora and Aphis gossypii , with the goal of identifying effective biocontrol agents for sustainable pest management in Bangladesh. Methodology Study location The study was carried out in the Entomology Laboratory at Patuakhali Science and Technology University (PSTU), Dumki, Bangladesh, from December 2017 to March 2018. Experiments were conducted under laboratory conditions, with an average temperature of 21.0 ± 4°C and a relative humidity of 67.05 ± 0.95%. Collection and Identification of Predators and Prey Adult male and female ladybird beetles were collected from unsprayed fields using sweep nets. Each pair was housed separately in Petri dishes (9.0 × 1.5 cm). Bean aphids ( Aphis craccivora ) and brinjal aphids ( Aphis gossypii ) were collected daily from infested plants at the teacher’s quarters of PSTU, from various plant parts including leaves, stems, shoots, and inflorescences. Identification of both predators and prey was conducted to the species level using conventional taxonomic keys and compound microscopy. Three ladybird beetle species, Coccinella transversalis , Menochilus sexmaculatus , and Cycloneda sanguinea and two aphid species, A. craccivora and A. gossypii were confirmed. Mass Rearing of Predators and Prey Predators were mass-reared in the laboratory to ensure a sufficient supply for experiments. Adult beetles housed in Petri dishes laid eggs, which were monitored three times daily. Dishes' bottoms were lined with Whiteman No. 1 filter paper. Adults were fed aphid-infested bean and brinjal plant material. Upon hatching, larvae were transferred to Petri dishes (11 × 1.5 cm) and reared until adulthood. Larval development was observed every 24 hours; instars were recorded by monitoring exuviae. Pupae were left undisturbed until adult emergence, and pupal duration was noted. Assessment of Predation Efficiency Newly hatched larvae of each predator species were placed individually in Petri dishes (9.0 × 1.5 cm), with three replicates per species. Moist blotting paper was used to maintain humidity and was replaced regularly. Aphids were provided daily on host leaves, whose bases were wrapped in moistened cotton to prevent desiccation. Prey densities were set as follows: 20 aphids for first and second instar, 50 for third instar, and 100 for fourth instar and adults. Aphid consumption was recorded every 24 hours under a magnifying lens, and prey was replenished daily to maintain constant numbers. Potentiality evaluation of biocontrol agents in tri-trophic interactions Three adult predators of the same species were released in separate Petri dishes containing 150 aphids from bean and brinjal, along with their host twigs. Data were collected at 3-hour intervals to assess the potential of these predators. Similarly, the same procedure was applied to other predators, and data were recorded separately. Statistical analysis Data were analyzed using a completely randomized design (CRD) with three replications. Mean values ± standard errors were plotted using Sigma plot 8.0. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multiple mean comparisons were performed with the General Linear Model (GLM) procedure in the Statistical Analysis System (SAS, 2003) Version 9.1. Differences among mean values were identified using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) at a 5% probability (P < 0.05). Result This study assessed the predatory performance of three coccinellid beetle species, Coccinella transversalis, Menochilus sexmaculatus , and Cycloneda sanguinea against aphid populations infesting bean and brinjal plants (Fig. 1 ). Feeding behaviour showed significant variation across all larval instars and adult stages, revealing distinct patterns in prey consumption and developmental progress. All three species displayed a notable preference for bean aphids over brinjal aphids, consuming considerably more of the former. A consistent rise in aphid consumption was observed as larval development progressed ( Table 1 ) , aligning with previous findings (Salman et al. 2014). However, differences in predation efficiency, instar duration, and instar-specific feeding capacity were noted among the species, indicating interspecific variation in their biological control potential. Quantitative data on larval predation are detailed in Tables 1 and 2 , while adult predation results are summarized in Table 3 . Predation efficiency of larvae Among the three species, C. transversalis exhibited the highest and most consistent predation on both aphid species, with a clear increase in consumption from the early instars to a peak in the fourth instar stage. On Day 13, C. transversalis larvae consumed up to 55.00 ± 18.50 bean aphids (Table 1 ), while the maximum for brinjal aphids was 46.00 ± 1.67 (Table 1 ), highlighting its strong feeding potential on both hosts. Feeding began as early as Day 1 with modest intake, gradually increasing and peaking sharply during Days 12–14 before declining prior to pupation ( Table 1 ). Menochilus sexmaculatus exhibited a similar feeding progression but with slightly lower predation rates compared to C. transversalis . The species reached its maximum consumption earlier (around Day 8), with up to 37.67 ± 2.00 bean aphids and 41.82 ± 2.01 brinjal aphids (Table 1 ), reflecting a shorter larval duration. Although effective, its feeding potential appeared slightly lower and more variable compared to that of C. transversalis . C. Sanguinea demonstrated the lowest aphid consumption overall, especially in the earlier larval stages. However, consumption gradually increased through the later instars. The highest daily intake was 19.67 ± 1.30 bean aphids and 18.00 ± 1.67 brinjal aphids (Table 1 ) during the final larval stage (Days 14–15), showing that while this species is less voracious, it maintains steady feeding through development. Instar-wise analysis of predation ( Table 2 ) revealed clear differences in aphid consumption among the three coccinellid predators. Among these, the first instar of C. sanguinea showed the highest predation rates on both hosts (11.40 ± 0.62 on A. craccivora and 11.70 ± 0.73 on A. gossypii), likely due to its longer developmental period during this stage, which allows for extended feeding. C. transversalis demonstrated intermediate predation levels (11.33 ± 0.50 on A. craccivora and 9.67 ± 0.24 on A. gossypii ), while M. sexmaculatus recorded the lowest predation on A. craccivora (5.39 ± 0.60). In the second instar, C. transversalis showed the highest predation on both aphid species (24.73 ± 0.62 and 23.58 ± 0.14), with the other species consuming fewer aphids. During the third instar, M. sexmaculatus consumed more A. craccivora (41.69 ± 0.11), but C. transversalis remained dominant on A. gossypii (36.10 ± 0.73). The fourth instar exhibited the highest predatory activity across all species, with C. transversalis consuming the most significant number of aphids. Overall, total aphid predation was highest in C. transversalis , followed by M. sexmaculatus and C. sanguinea . These results ( Table 2 ) highlight the superior predatory performance of C. transversalis , especially during the later instars, indicating its potential as an effective biocontrol agent against aphid pests. Table 1 Per day prey consumption rates by larvae of different predator species (values are expressed in (Mean ± SE) Predator Species Prey Species* Number of consumptions ± standard error Days** 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 C. transversalis 1. 2.5 ± 0.33 3.67 ± 0.33 5.16 ± 0.17 5.00 ± 0.00 6.00 ± 0.00 6.50 ± 0.50 7.23 ± 0.37 7.41 ± 0.83 7.67 ± 0.50 8.00 ± 1.00 11.34 ± 0.51 19.00 ± 1.00 55.0 ± 18.50 43.33 ± 3.50 23.0 ± 8.00 3.66 ± 0.90 2. 2.16 ± 0.17 3.00 ± 0.00 4.16 ± 0.50 5.00 ± 0.00 4.56 ± 0.00 6.00 ± 0.00 8.00 ± 0.58 7.41 ± 0.23 7.00 ± 0.00 9.00 ± 0.61 12.69 ± 0 20.00 ± 0.00 33.67 ± 2.67 46.00 ± 1.67 27.67 ± 6.99 5.00 ± 2.00 M. sexmaculatus 1. 2.33 ± 0.33 3.00 ± 0.00 5.62 ± 0.33 9.00 ± 1.00 13.84 ± 0.56 28.00 ± 0.66 31.0 ± 2.65 37.67 ± 2.00 12.46 ± 2.88 - - - - - - - 2. 3.00 ± 0.61 4.38 ± 0.46 6.00 ± 0.74 8.67 ± 1.00 12.00 ± 0.69 21.33 ± 1.01 27.00 ± 1.17 41.82 ± 2.01 16.78 ± 1.42 - - - - - - - C. sanguinea 1. 2.33 ± .33 3.00 ± 0.00 2.67 ± 0.38 3.40 ± 0.37 4.00 ± 0.00 4.29 ± 0.26 4.66 ± 0.42 5.00 ± 0.67 6.00 ± 0.70 8.00 ± 1.30 10.00 ± 0.49 12.00 ± 1.32 15.24 ± 1.00 19.48 ± 1.00 19.67 ± 1.30 6.00 ± 1.28 2. 2.33 ± .33 2.67 ± 0.38 2.67 ± 0.38 3.40 ± .37 4.35 ± 0.39 5.00 ± 1.00 4.46 ± 0.42 5.73 ± 0.99 5.73 ± 0.33 9.00 ± 0.69 8.68 ± 0.87 11.63 ± 1.00 15.00 ± 2.33 16.57 ± 0.74 18.00 ± 1.67 13.00 ± 3.00 *1. A. craccivora 2. A. gossypi ** Here, Days correspond to the developmental instars as follows: C. transversalis : first instar (Days 1–3), second instar (Days 4–7), third instar (Days 8–11), fourth instar (Days 11–16); M. sexmaculatus : first instar (Days 1–2), second instar (Days 2–4), third instar (Days 4–6), fourth instar (Days 7–9); C. sanguinea : first instar (Days 1–4), second instar (Days 5–7), third instar (Days 8–11), fourth instar (Days 12–16). Table 2 Predation Efficiency in the development stages of predator species (values are expressed in (Mean ± SE) Predator species Prey Instar-wise predation Total 1st instar 2nd instar 3rd instar 4th instar C. transversalis A. craccivora 11.33 ± 0.50 24.73 ± 0.62 34.30 ± 0.23 146.00 ± 7.33 216.36 ± 7.38 A. gossypi 9.67 ± .24 23.58 ± 0.14 36.10 ± 0.73 132.46 ± 4.60 201.81 ± 4.67 M. sexmaculatus A. craccivora 5.39 ± .60 14.75 ± 1.15 41.69 ± 0.11 81.00 ± 4.73 142.88 ± 5.75 A. gossypi 7.23 ± 0.99 14.66 ± 1.02 33.33 ± 0.67 84.66 ± 3.02 140.02 ± 3.88 C. sanguinea A. craccivora 11.40 ± 0.62 13.00 ± 0.00 29.02 ± 1.67 72.33 ± 0.66 125.75 ± 1.90 A. gossypi 11.7 ± 0.73 13.67 ± 0.33 29.30 ± 0. 58 74.00 ± 1.00 128.67 ± 1.41​ Predation efficiency of adult beetles Aphid consumption by adult beetles over three consecutive days revealed significant species-specific differences in predatory performance ( Table 3 ) . Among the three coccinellid species, Coccinella transversalis consistently consumed the highest number of aphids across all days and both prey types. On A. craccivora , its consumption ranged from 65.00 ± 4.58 to 68.67 ± 8.15 aphids per day, followed by Menochilus sexmaculatus (48.67 ± 6.39 to 59.77 ± 5.40) and Cycloneda sanguinea (30.85 ± 10.66 to 45.64 ± 12.33). A similar trend was observed for A. gossypii , where C. transversalis outperformed the other species (43.81 ± 6.40 to 51.62 ± 7.63), followed closely by M. sexmaculatus , while C. sanguinea consumed the least. Additionally, higher standard deviations (SD) observed in C. sanguinea indicate greater variability in feeding behavior. Table 3 Prey consumption rates of adult predators (values are expressed in Mean ± SE) Predator species Prey Day-wise Predation 1 2 3 Total C. transversalis A. craccivora 68.67 ± 8.15 65.00 ± 4.58 68.67 ± 8.15 202.34 ± 7.16 A. gossypi 43.81 ± 6.40 47.66 ± 10.00 51.62 ± 7.63 143.09 ± 8.15 M. sexmaculatus A. craccivora 49.55 ± 5.64 48.67 ± 6.39 59.77 ± 5.40 157.99 ± 5.83 A. gossypi 41.06 ± 5.38 48.67 ± 2.25 46.83 ± 2.18 136.56 ± 3.59 C. sanguinea A. craccivora 35.73 ± 4.06 30.85 ± 10.66 45.64 ± 12.33 112.22 ± 9.70 A. gossypi 30.34 ± 3.16 24.42 ± 12.27 26.45 ± 5.00 81.21 ± 7.86 Assessment of Predatory Behavior and Host Specificity The assessment of predatory behavior and host specificity across larval and adult stages revealed apparent interspecific differences among the three coccinellid beetle species. The figure indicates that nosh rate of the larva of all the three species increases with the increase in ages. That means the gradual growing of the larvae. The graph strongly evident that larvae of M. sexmaculatus is a strong predator. It consumed almost 150 aphids within 9 days while it took 16 days in case of C. tansversalis and C. sanguinea consume less than 150 within 16 days. The total feeding rate of bean aphid during the larval life (i.e. from 1st instar to 4th instar) of C.tansversalis, M. sexmacultus and C. sanguinea was 217.00 ± 7.52, 142.44 ± 5.72 and 125.67 ± 2.00 respectively ( Fig. 2 a ) . The complete scoffing of brinjal aphid fom1st instar upto pre-pupal day of C.tansversalis, M. sexmacultus and C. sanguinea was 195.33 ± 5.00, 140.02 ± 3.88 and 135.69 ± 3.30. But fostering of brinjal aphid by M. sexmacultus larve throughout its entire larval period that´s upto 9th days was 140.02 ± 3.88 which is transcendental than C.tansversalis and C. sanguinea which was 48.02 ± 1.13 and 37.0 ± 1.34 respectively ( Fig. 2 b ) . In the feeding preference of beetle, comparative consumption of bean aphid was higher than brinjal aphid in all the three species.No. of bean aphid (420) and brinjal aphid (347) consumption by C.tansversalis varies significantly. Bean and brinjal aphid consumption by M. sexmaculatus also shows significantly different and in bean the no. was (310) and in brinjal (280). Aphid consumption on both host doesn´t show significantly different in case of C. sanguinea. The graph evidents that preying capacity of C.tansversalis was higher followed by M. sexmacultus and then C. sanguinea ( Fig. 2 c ) . In stage-wise comparison, Coccinella transversalis consistently showed the highest aphid consumption across both larval and adult stages, indicating a strong predatory capacity and broad host acceptance. In larvae, total aphid consumption was highest for C. transversalis (bean aphid: 216.36 ± 7.38; brinjal aphid: 201.81 ± 4.67), followed by M. sexmaculatus (142.44 ± 5.72, 140.02 ± 3.88) and C. sanguinea (125.75 ± 1.90, 128.67 ± 1.41​), respectively (Table 2 ). In adult aphid predation was also highest in C. transversalis (202.34 ± 7.16 on A. craccivora , 143.09 ± 8.15 on A. gossypii ), followed by M. sexmaculatus (157.99 ± 5.83, 136.56 ± 3.59) and C. sanguinea (112.22 ± 9.70, 81.21 ± 7.86), respectively (Table 3 ). When adjusted for the duration of feeding, M. sexmaculatus consumed significantly more aphids within 9 days 142.88 ± 5.75 on A. craccivora and 140.00 ± 4.00 on A. gossypii compared to C. transversalis and C. sanguinea , which required 16 days to consume fewer prey ( Table 4 ) . Overall, the data indicate that C. transversalis exhibited the most significant and most consistent predatory efficiency against both aphid species. The graphical trends (Fig. 1 ) further support these results, showing a marked preference of all species for A. craccivora over A. gossypii . Table 4 Age-Wise Cumulative Predatory Comparison of larvae (values are expressed in Mean ± SE) Predator species Age of larvae (day) Prey Cumulative Predation C. transversalis 9 A. craccivora 51.14 ± .1.25 A. gossypi 47.29 ± 0.93 M. sexmaculatus 9 A. craccivora 142.88 ± 5.75 A. gossypi 140.00 ± 4.00 C. sanguinea 9 A. craccivora 35.35 ± 1.25 A. gossypi 36.35 ± 1.72 Feeding potentiality in Tritrophic interaction During the study of tri-trophic interaction, all three coccinellid species were found more active and showed peak predation in the first three hours, with C. transversal being the most voracious, consuming 36.33 ± 2.01 aphids, followed by M. sexmaculatus (30.33 ± 0.22) and C. sanguinea (16.67 ± 0.66). Feeding declined by the sixth and ninth hours across species, indicating a clear preference for foraging behaviour early in the feeding period ( Fig. 3 ) . Discussion The comparative assessment of predatory potential among C. transversalis , M. sexmaculatus , and C. sanguinea demonstrates apparent interspecific variations in aphid consumption and host preference. Among the tested species, C. transversalis emerged as the most voracious predator across all stages, particularly in the fourth instar, reflecting the increasing metabolic demand and body size associated with pupation (Işıkber & Copland 2001). Its cumulative larval consumption exceeded that of other species, with particularly high daily intake during mid-larval development. However, the longer development time (16 days) suggests that while C. transversal is effective, its predation efficiency per unit time is lower than that of M. sexmaculatus and may not be the most time-efficient option for rapid pest suppression. The findings of feeding behaviour (Table 2 and Table 3 ) indicate that C. transversalis is the most voracious and efficient adult predator among the three species, with a marked preference and higher predation rate, particularly on A. craccivora . In contrast, M. sexmaculatus demonstrated rapid feeding within a shorter development span, consuming nearly the same number of aphids as C. transversalis in almost half the time. This efficiency, coupled with high consumption during the fourth instar, supports previous observations by Saleem et al. (2014) and Priyadarshani et al. (2016), establishing its potential as a fast-acting biocontrol agent. The data also indicate that adult beetles maintain high predation rates, reinforcing their role in post-larval aphid suppression. High adult consumption rates further highlight its potential as a versatile biocontrol agent, capable of suppressing aphid populations at both the larval and adult stages. Cycloneda sanguinea , while less aggressive in terms of aphid consumption, maintained a consistent feeding pattern throughout its development. This species may be less efficient in high-density aphid infestations; however, its generalist predation behaviour and ecological adaptability make it valuable in diversified pest management strategies. Across both larval and adult stages, all species consumed more Aphis craccivora (bean aphids) than Aphis gossypii (brinjal aphids), likely due to differences in host plant characteristics such as trichome density, surface texture, and chemical composition. This preference aligns with findings by Omkar and Mishra (2005) and Dalin et al. (2008), which highlight plant morphology as a determinant in prey selection by coccinellids. Bean aphids consistently supported higher predation across all three beetle species, possibly due to the plant's relatively smooth surface, higher palatability, and nutritional quality, which facilitate prey detection and handling. Host aphid species also significantly influenced feeding behaviour. A. craccivora consistently supported higher predation rates than A. gossypii , which may reflect differences in aphid size, nutritional quality, or defensive behaviour. Comparative studies by Bukero et al. (2014) and Prabhakar and Roy (2010) similarly concluded that prey suitability strongly affects predator efficiency, development, and overall biocontrol potential. Variations in food conversion efficiency and relative growth rate among larval instars (Jalali et al.2009) also help explain fluctuations in feeding performance. Similar trends were reported by Finlayson et al. (2010), who observed that aphid consumption varied significantly among four lady beetle species, influenced by factors such as predator size, prey toxicity, and beetle nativity. Collectively, this highlights that host plant-mediated aphid suitability is a key factor in optimising predator effectiveness. The tritrophic interaction complexity arises from the host plant's influence on the nutritional quality of aphid prey. The suitability of aphids from various host plants differed for the same species of ladybird beetle (Wu et al. 2009). The observed diurnal activity pattern, with feeding rates peaking in the first three hours, suggests that early-day release of predators in field biocontrol programs may enhance aphid suppression. Similar findings by Işıkber (2005) support this behaviour, linking early-day predation to metabolic compensation and reproductive readiness. Conclusion The comparative evaluation of Coccinella transversalis , Menochilus sexmaculatus , and Cheilomenes sanguinea revealed distinct strengths among the three predatory coccinellids. C. transversalis demonstrated the highest total predation particularly during its later larval stages capacity (216.36 ± 7.38 A. craccivora and 201.81 ± 4.67 A. gossypii were consumed at 4th instar), indicating strong potential for sustained aphid suppression. M. sexmaculatus exhibited superior time efficiency and fast action, which are critical in situations requiring immediate pest control. C. sanguinea , though less aggressive, maintained consistent predation and may be valuable in diversified biocontrol approaches. These findings underscore the significance of species-specific roles in aphid management and advocate for their incorporation into ecologically sound, IPM-based strategies. Further field-based studies are needed to validate their performance under variable agroecological conditions. Declarations Conflict of interest statement The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Funding Declaration This research work was carried out by the fund of National Science and Technology (NST) Fellowship, FY-2017-2018, Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangladesh. Author Contribution Most Shirina Akter: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing - original draft **. Md. Habibur Rahman:** Supervision. **Mohammad Atikur Rahman:** Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. **Md. Roushon Jamal: Writing** - review & editing. **S. M. Hemayet Jahan:** Data curation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing - review & editing. Acknowledgement We thank the Lab Technical of Department of Entomology, Patuakhali Science and Technology for helping us to mass rear of Ladybird beetles and aphids. This research work was carried out by the fund of National Science and Technology (NST) Fellowship, Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangladesh. References Ahmad ME, Nawal D, Kumari M, Kumari K (2024) Prey and host records of Coccinella spp. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) in India (A review). J Adv Zool 45(5): 170–187. https://doi.org/10.53555/jaz.v45i5.4738 Ahmed MT, Miah MRU, Amin MR, Hossain MM, Suh SJ, Kwon YJ (2019) Plant material as an alternative tool for management of aphid in country bean field. Int J Pest Manag 65(2): 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2018.1494864 Ali A, Rizvi PQ (2007) Development and predatory performance of Coccinella septempunctata L. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on different aphid species. J Biol Sci 7(8): 1478–1483. https://doi.org/10.3923/jbs.2007.1478.1483 Ali A, Rizvi PQ (2011) Screening of different cultivars of rapeseed-mustard against mustard aphid, Lipaphis erysimi Kaltenbach with respect to sowing dates. Asian J Plant Sci 10(8): 383–392. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2011.383.392 Ali A, Rizvi PQ, Pathak M (2009) Reproductive performance of Coccinella transversalis Fabricius (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on different aphid species. Biosystematica 3(1): 37–41. Ashraf M, Ishtiaq M, Asif M, Adrees M, Ayub MN, Mehmood T, Awan MN (2010) A study on laboratory rearing of lady bird beetle ( Coccinella septempunctata ) to observe its fecundity and longevity on natural and artificial diets. Int J Biol 2(1): 165–172. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijb.v2n1p165 Bajracharya S, Budha PB, Baral S (2023) Feeding efficiency of Coccinella septempunctata Linnaeus and Propylea luteopustulata (Mulsant) against mustard aphid, Lipaphis erysimi (Kaltenbach). Nepalese J Zool 7(1): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3126/njz.v7i1.56304 Bellows T (2001) Restoring population balance through natural enemy introductions. Biol Control 21(3): 199–205. https://doi.org/10.1006/bcon.2001.0936 Bukero A, Lanjar AG, Solangi AW, Memon AA, Thebo G, Nahyo SA, Buriro RA (2014) Voracity rate and development period of Coccinella transversalis (Fabricius) on three aphid species. Sci Int (Lahore) 26(5): 2255–2257. Chowdhury SP, Ahad MA, Amin MR, Hasan MS (2008a) Biology of ladybird beetle, Micraspis discolor (Fab.) (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera). Int J Sustain Crop Prod 3(3): 39–44. Chowdhury SP, Ahad MA, Amin MR, Rasel NA (2008b) Bean aphid predation efficiency of lady bird beetle, Micraspis discolor F. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). J Soil Nat 2(3): 40–45. Dalin P, Ågren J, Björkman C, Huttunen P, Kärkkäinen K (2008) Leaf trichome formation and plant resistance to herbivory. In: Schaller J (Ed.) Induced Plant Resistance to Herbivory (pp. 89–105). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8182-8_4 De Clercq P, Mason PG, Babendreier D (2011) Benefits and risks of exotic biological control agents. BioControl 56(4): 681–698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-011-9372-8 Evans EW (2000) Egg production in response to combined alternative foods by the predator Coccinella transversalis . Entomol Exp Appl 94(2): 141–147. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1570-7458.2000.00614.x Finlayson C, Alyokhin A, Gross S, Porter E (2010) Differential consumption of four aphid species by four lady beetle species. J Insect Sci 10(31): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1673/031.010.3101 Holloway GJ, De Jong PW, Brakefield PM, De Vos H (1991) Chemical defence in ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae). I. Distribution of coccinelline and individual variation in defence in 7-spot ladybirds ( Coccinella septempunctata ). Chemoecology 2(1): 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01240660 Işıkber AA (2005) Functional response of two coccinellid predators, Scymnus levaillanti and Cycloneda sanguinea , to the cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii . Turk J Agric For 29: 347–355. Işıkber A, Copland M (2001) Food consumption and utilisation by larvae of two coccinellid predators, Scymnus levaillanti and Cycloneda sanguinea , on cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii . BioControl 46(4): 455–467. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014181920308 Jalali MA, Tirry L, De Clercq P (2009) Food consumption and immature growth of Adalia bipunctata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on a natural prey and a factitious food. Eur J Entomol 106(2): 193–198. https://doi.org/10.14411/eje.2009.024 Kansman JT, Nersten CE, Hermann SL (2023) Smelling danger: Lady beetle odors affect aphid population abundance and feeding, but not movement between plants. Basic Appl Ecol 71: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2023.05.004 Katsarou I, Margaritopoulos JT, Tsitsipis JA, Perdikis DC, Zarpas KD (2005) Effect of temperature on development, growth and feeding of Coccinella septempunctata and Hippodamia convergens reared on the tobacco aphid, Myzus persicae nicotianae . BioControl 50(4): 565–588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-004-2838-1 Khan IA, Wan F-H (2015) Comparison of life tables of Coccinella septempunctata L. and Harmonia axyridis (Pallas) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) reared on Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) biotype B prey. J Entomol Zool Stud 3(3): 243–248. Kumar B, Pandey G, Mishra G, Omkar N (2013) Predatory performance of aphidophagous ladybirds: A measure of prey suitability? Int J Trop Insect Sci 33(2): 120–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742758413000076 Macedo TB, Bastos CS, Higley LG, Ostlie KR, Madhavan S (2003) Photosynthetic responses of soybean to soybean aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae) injury. J Econ Entomol 96(1): 188–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/96.1.188 Miao J, Wu K, Hopper KR, Li G (2007) Population dynamics of Aphis glycines (Homoptera: Aphididae) and impact of natural enemies in northern China. Environ Entomol 36(4): 840–848. https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225X Mishra G, Kumar B, Shahid M, Singh D, Omkar N (2011) Evaluation of four co-occurring ladybirds for use as biocontrol agents of the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum (Homoptera: Aphididae). Biocontrol Sci Technol 21(8): 991–997. https://doi.org/10.1080/09583157.2011.594953 Mishra G, Omkar N, Kumar B, Pandey G (2012) Stage and age-specific predation in four aphidophagous ladybird beetles. Biocontrol Sci Technol 22(4): 463–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/09583157.2012.664617 Nisa F, Biswas AP, Afroz M, Miah MRU, Hassan J, Rahman MM, Hossain MM, Rahman MM (2024) Molecular characterization of aphid and their mutualistic and antagonistic interactions with co-occurring herbivore in country bean. Discover Agric 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-024-00135-x Norris RH, Silva-Torres CS, Lujan M, Wilson-Rankin EE, Mauck KE (2023) Footprints of predatory lady beetles stimulate increased dispersal of aphid prey, but do not alter feeding behavior or spread of a non-persistently transmitted plant virus. Food Webs 37: e00325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2023.e00325 Omkar N, Mishra G (2005) Preference–performance of a generalist predatory ladybird: A laboratory study. Biol Control 34(2): 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2005.05.007 Prabhakar AK, Roy SP (2010) Evaluation of the consumption rates of dominant coccinellid predators on aphids in North-East Bihar. The Bioscan 5(3): 491–493. Priyadarshani TDC, Hemachandra KS, Sirisena UGAI, Wijayaguasekara HNP (2016) Developmental biology and feeding efficiency of Menochilus sexmaculatus (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) (Fabricius) reared on Aphis craccivora (Hemiptera: Aphididae) (Koch). Trop Agric Res 27(2): 115–122. https://doi.org/10.4038/tar.v27i2.8160 Rahman MM, Jarugula S, Bagewadi B, Fayad A, Karasev AV, Naidu RA (2023) Characterization of a new country bean (Lablab purpureus) lineage of Bean Common Mosaic Necrosis Virus. Plant Dis 108(2): 434–441. https://doi.org/10.1094/pdis-04-23-0822-re Rain FF, Aslam AFM, Ringki HS, Sultana N, Akter N, Howlader AJ (2016) Coccinellid predators of aphid and their phylogenetic analysis using COI gene sequences. Int J Appl Sci Biotechnol 4(3): 408–416. https://doi.org/10.3126/ijasbt.v4i3.15782 Rakhshan R, Ahmed E (2018) Effect of host plants on the reproductive aspects of Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Curr Investig Agric Curr Res 3(5):453–457. https://doi.org/10.32474/ciacr.2018.03.000175 Rondoni G, Borges I, Collatz J, Conti E, Costamagna AC, Dumont F, et al. (2020) Exotic ladybirds for biological control of herbivorous insects – a review. Entomol Exp Appl 169(1): 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.12963 Saleem M, Hussain D, Anwar H, Saleem M, Ghouse G, Abbas M (2014) Predation efficacy of Menochilus sexmaculatus Fabricius (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) against Macrosiphum rosae under laboratory conditions. J Entomol Zool Stud 2(3): 160–163. Saleem M, Saleem M, Hussain D, Abbas M (2019) Predation efficacy of ladybird beetle (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) against wheat aphid under laboratory conditions. J Entomol Zool Stud 7(4): 709–712. Salman AMA, El-Harery MA, El-Solimany EA (2014) Effects of population densities of Aphis craccivora Koch on predatory efficiency of Coccinella septempunctata L., Coccinella undecimpunctata L., and Chrysoperla carnea Stephens larvae under laboratory conditions. Middle East J Agric Res 3(1): 116–122. Sarwar M, Saqib SM (2010) Rearing of predatory seven spotted ladybird beetle, Coccinella septempunctata L. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on natural and artificial diets under laboratory conditions. Pak J Zool 42(1): 47–51. Shakeel M, Akram W, Ali A, Ali MW, Nasim W (2014) Frequency of aphid ( Aphis gossypii G.) on brinjal ( Solanum melongena L.) and farming practices in the agroclimatic conditions of Faisalabad, Pakistan. Int J Agric Innov Res 2(5): 841–842. Sharmin MA, Amin MR, Miah MRU, Akanda AM (2021) Seasonal dynamics of bean aphids and its relationship with the abundance of lady bird beetles. Bangladesh J Zool 48(2): 357–363. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjz.v48i2.52375 Sheela N, Shinde CU (2019) Predatory potential of spotted ladybird beetle Harmonia octomaculata (Fabricius) (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera) on lucerne aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum (Harris) (Aphididae: Hemiptera) under laboratory conditions. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 8(9): 832–838. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.809.100 Smith CM, Boyko EV (2006) The molecular bases of plant resistance and defense responses to aphid feeding: Current status. Entomol Exp Appl 122(1): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1570-7458.2006.00503.x Solangi BK, Hullio MH, Baloch N (2007) Biological parameters and prey consumption by zigzag beetle Menochilus sexmaculatus Fab. against Rhopalosiphum maidis Fitch, Aphis gossypii Glov., and Therioaphis trifolii Monell. Sarhad J Agric 23(4): 1097–1110. Wu P, He J, Ge Y, Liu Z, Zhang R (2023) Comparison of predatory performance among three ladybird species, Harmonia axyridis, Coccinella septempunctata , and Hippodamia variegata , feeding on goji berry psyllid, Bactericera gobica . Insects 15(1): 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15010019 Wu X, Zhou X, Pang B (2009) Influence of five host plants of Aphis gossypii Glover on some population parameters of Hippodamia variegata (Goeze). J Pest Sci 83(2): 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-009-0272 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 19 May, 2026 Reviews received at journal 19 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 10 Feb, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 09 Feb, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 09 Oct, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 09 Oct, 2025 First submitted to journal 06 Oct, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7793888","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":588886658,"identity":"c1884539-c05b-4ce9-9957-e929d32948b8","order_by":0,"name":"Most Shirina Akter","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Ministry of Agriculture","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Most","middleName":"Shirina","lastName":"Akter","suffix":""},{"id":588886659,"identity":"8d787daa-9c15-4c8d-bf8e-142037e9a165","order_by":1,"name":"Md. Habibur Rahman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Patuakhali Science and Technology University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Md.","middleName":"Habibur","lastName":"Rahman","suffix":""},{"id":588886660,"identity":"910c48c2-d4b4-4bee-be86-a308c34d5337","order_by":2,"name":"Mohammad Atikur Rahman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Patuakhali Science and Technology University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mohammad","middleName":"Atikur","lastName":"Rahman","suffix":""},{"id":588886661,"identity":"242cfaa8-f3bc-441b-93be-a1b9865fae35","order_by":3,"name":"Md. Roushon Jamal","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Bangladesh Public Administration Training Centre (BPATC)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Md.","middleName":"Roushon","lastName":"Jamal","suffix":""},{"id":588886663,"identity":"f6ebbbdc-3c31-4ea6-9310-36ea76b0bca7","order_by":4,"name":"S. M. Hemayet Jahan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Patuakhali Science and Technology University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"S.","middleName":"M. Hemayet","lastName":"Jahan","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-10-06 19:23:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7793888/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7793888/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":102420231,"identity":"deda883a-1a60-4d6d-b304-1555f6cd2e3f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-11 13:34:30","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":136467,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePredatory performance of three coccinellid beetle species, \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis, Menochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e against \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypi\u003c/em\u003e at a glance\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7793888/v1/8b8fbc0711479a04ee796ab1.png"},{"id":102745561,"identity":"75ad8909-9361-423f-8f38-9170db41e0dc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-16 08:51:47","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":64736,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCumulative predation and host preference of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCheilomenes sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e — (a) larvae on bean aphid, (b) larvae on brinjal aphid, and (c) adults on both hosts.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7793888/v1/bcb35aa11bd59eac08986f21.jpeg"},{"id":102420232,"identity":"7adceb19-6421-4f61-8815-7b28160e6422","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-11 13:34:30","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":21618,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTritrophic interaction among the species\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7793888/v1/55f743b0136478a30d49144a.jpeg"},{"id":102750298,"identity":"8fde9d0e-8a93-409d-b353-ab43f98e8950","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-16 09:18:56","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1202657,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7793888/v1/2837a798-60f4-4871-a5bc-7008943c54e3.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"In Vitro Predation Efficiency of Ladybird Beetles as a Biocontrol Agent on Aphids Available in Bangladesh Coast","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae) are globally significant and destructive insect pests in temperate and subtropical agroecosystems, causing direct damage through sap-feeding and indirectly by transmitting plant viruses (Nisa et al. 2024). Their parthenogenetic reproduction enables rapid population growth under favourable conditions (Solangi et al. 2007; Ahmad et al. 2024), whereas phloem feeding results in chlorosis, stunted growth, reduced photosynthesis, and the drop of flowers or fruits (Ali \u0026amp; Rizvi 2011; Macedo et al. 2003). Additionally, honeydew excretion by aphids fosters sooty mould, lowering plant productivity and marketability (Holloway et al. 1991; Chowdhury et al. 2008a), and their role as vectors of mosaic and leaf roll viruses poses ongoing threats to crop health and food security (Smit and Boyko 2006; Salman et al. 2014; Bajracharya et al. 2023).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Bangladesh, aphids such as \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e cause considerable damage to major vegetable crops like country bean and brinjal, posing a threat to rural livelihoods and smallholder farming systems (Rahman et al. 2023). Severe infestations of \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e can cause substantial damage to bean plants from the seedling to pod-bearing stages, often leading to complete failure in flowering and fruiting, with yield losses ranging from 20\u0026ndash;40% (Sharmin et al. 2021; Ahmed et al. 2019; Salman et al. 2014; Chowdhury et al. 2008a). Similarly, \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e can markedly reduce the yield and quality of brinjal, especially during peak infestations in February (Shakeel et al. 2014).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs chemical insecticides provide immediate results (Katsarou 2005), they are the primary pest management strategy in Bangladesh (Chowdhury et al. 2008b). Overreliance on pesticides and their indiscriminate use have raised serious concerns, including environmental pollution, the development of pest resistance, and the decline of beneficial arthropods such as natural enemies of aphids (Solangi et al. 2007; Ashraf et al. 2010). Moreover, many farmers apply these chemicals without proper safety measures or technical guidance, increasing risks to human health and ecosystems (Shakeel et al. 2014). These challenges underscore the need for more sustainable pest control approaches.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBiological control, a key component of integrated pest management (IPM), offers an ecologically sound alternative to synthetic insecticides (Sheela \u0026amp; Shinde 2019; De Clercq et al. 2011; Bellows 2001). Among biological agents, ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae) are considered the primary natural predators (Salman et al., 2014) and the most effective and well-studied aphid enemies (Miao et al. 2007; Rondoni et al. 2020), due to their strong predatory efficiency, foraging behaviour, and reproductive capacity (Ali \u0026amp; Rizvi 2007; Ahmad et al. 2024). Both larvae and adults feed on aphids and other soft-bodied pests, including whiteflies, psyllids, mealybugs, and scale insects (Solangi et al. 2007; Ali \u0026amp; Rizvi 2007).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, the predation efficiency and reproductive performance of coccinellids is influenced by multiple factors, including prey species, prey availability, quality of their prey and host plants, host plant characteristics, predator developmental stage, and environmental conditions (Ali et al. 2009; Rakhshan and Ahmad 2018; Saleem et al. 2019; Evans 2000). Predators regulate prey not only by direct consumption but also indirectly by altering prey behaviour and physiology in ways that affect reproduction and survival (Kansman et al. 2023; Norris et al. 2023). The success of biological control programs, however, depends on understanding the predator's biology, feeding behaviour, and ecological adaptability (Khan and Wan 2015; Priyadarshani et al. 2016; Sarwar and Saqib 2010). Efficient predation rates measured in the laboratory correspond closely to field consumption patterns (Finlayson et al. 2010).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral studies have explored the predatory efficiency of coccinellids feeding on aphid species (Rain et al. 2016; Mishra et al. 2011, 2012; Kumar et al. 2013; Wu et al., 2023). Despite the extensive literature on bean aphids and brinjal aphids, only a few studies have examined the predation efficiency of different ladybird beetle species on these aphids in the coastal region of Bangladesh. Therefore, this study aims to assess the predation efficiency of three natural predators (both adult and grub) \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis, Menochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e\u0026mdash;against \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e, with the goal of identifying effective biocontrol agents for sustainable pest management in Bangladesh.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy location\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study was carried out in the Entomology Laboratory at Patuakhali Science and Technology University (PSTU), Dumki, Bangladesh, from December 2017 to March 2018. Experiments were conducted under laboratory conditions, with an average temperature of 21.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4\u0026deg;C and a relative humidity of 67.05\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.95%.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCollection and Identification of Predators and Prey\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdult male and female ladybird beetles were collected from unsprayed fields using sweep nets. Each pair was housed separately in Petri dishes (9.0 \u0026times; 1.5 cm). Bean aphids (\u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e) and brinjal aphids (\u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e) were collected daily from infested plants at the teacher\u0026rsquo;s quarters of PSTU, from various plant parts including leaves, stems, shoots, and inflorescences. Identification of both predators and prey was conducted to the species level using conventional taxonomic keys and compound microscopy. Three ladybird beetle species, \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e and two aphid species, \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e were confirmed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMass Rearing of Predators and Prey\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePredators were mass-reared in the laboratory to ensure a sufficient supply for experiments. Adult beetles housed in Petri dishes laid eggs, which were monitored three times daily. Dishes' bottoms were lined with Whiteman No. 1 filter paper. Adults were fed aphid-infested bean and brinjal plant material. Upon hatching, larvae were transferred to Petri dishes (11 \u0026times; 1.5 cm) and reared until adulthood. Larval development was observed every 24 hours; instars were recorded by monitoring exuviae. Pupae were left undisturbed until adult emergence, and pupal duration was noted.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAssessment of Predation Efficiency\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNewly hatched larvae of each predator species were placed individually in Petri dishes (9.0 \u0026times; 1.5 cm), with three replicates per species. Moist blotting paper was used to maintain humidity and was replaced regularly. Aphids were provided daily on host leaves, whose bases were wrapped in moistened cotton to prevent desiccation. Prey densities were set as follows: 20 aphids for first and second instar, 50 for third instar, and 100 for fourth instar and adults. Aphid consumption was recorded every 24 hours under a magnifying lens, and prey was replenished daily to maintain constant numbers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePotentiality evaluation of biocontrol agents in tri-trophic interactions\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThree adult predators of the same species were released in separate Petri dishes containing 150 aphids from bean and brinjal, along with their host twigs. Data were collected at 3-hour intervals to assess the potential of these predators. Similarly, the same procedure was applied to other predators, and data were recorded separately.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData were analyzed using a completely randomized design (CRD) with three replications. Mean values\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;standard errors were plotted using Sigma plot 8.0. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multiple mean comparisons were performed with the General Linear Model (GLM) procedure in the Statistical Analysis System (SAS, 2003) Version 9.1. Differences among mean values were identified using Duncan\u0026rsquo;s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) at a 5% probability (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Result","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study assessed the predatory performance of three coccinellid beetle species, \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis, Menochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e against aphid populations infesting bean and brinjal plants (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Feeding behaviour showed significant variation across all larval instars and adult stages, revealing distinct patterns in prey consumption and developmental progress. All three species displayed a notable preference for bean aphids over brinjal aphids, consuming considerably more of the former. A consistent rise in aphid consumption was observed as larval development progressed \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e, aligning with previous findings (Salman et al. 2014). However, differences in predation efficiency, instar duration, and instar-specific feeding capacity were noted among the species, indicating interspecific variation in their biological control potential. Quantitative data on larval predation are detailed in Tables\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, while adult predation results are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePredation efficiency of larvae\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong the three species, \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e exhibited the highest and most consistent predation on both aphid species, with a clear increase in consumption from the early instars to a peak in the fourth instar stage. On Day 13, \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e larvae consumed up to 55.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;18.50 bean aphids (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), while the maximum for brinjal aphids was 46.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.67 (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), highlighting its strong feeding potential on both hosts. Feeding began as early as Day 1 with modest intake, gradually increasing and peaking sharply during Days 12\u0026ndash;14 before declining prior to pupation \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e).\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e exhibited a similar feeding progression but with slightly lower predation rates compared to \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e. The species reached its maximum consumption earlier (around Day 8), with up to 37.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.00 bean aphids and 41.82\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.01 brinjal aphids (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), reflecting a shorter larval duration. Although effective, its feeding potential appeared slightly lower and more variable compared to \u003cem\u003ethat of C. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eC. Sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e demonstrated the lowest aphid consumption overall, especially in the earlier larval stages. However, consumption gradually increased through the later instars. The highest daily intake was 19.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.30 bean aphids and 18.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.67 brinjal aphids (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) during the final larval stage (Days 14\u0026ndash;15), showing that while this species is less voracious, it maintains steady feeding through development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInstar-wise analysis of predation \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e revealed clear differences in aphid consumption among the three coccinellid predators. Among these, the first instar of \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e showed the highest predation rates on both hosts (11.40\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.62 on A. craccivora and 11.70\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.73 on A. gossypii), likely due to its longer developmental period during this stage, which allows for extended feeding. \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e demonstrated intermediate predation levels (11.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.50 on \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and 9.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24 on \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e), while \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e recorded the lowest predation on \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e (5.39\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.60). In the second instar, \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e showed the highest predation on both aphid species (24.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.62 and 23.58\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.14), with the other species consuming fewer aphids. During the third instar, \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e consumed more \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e (41.69\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.11), but \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e remained dominant on \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e (36.10\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.73). The fourth instar exhibited the highest predatory activity across all species, with \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e consuming the most significant number of aphids. Overall, total aphid predation was highest in \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e, followed by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e. These results \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e highlight the superior predatory performance of \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e, especially during the later instars, indicating its potential as an effective biocontrol agent against aphid pests.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePer day prey consumption rates by larvae of different predator species (values are expressed in (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"18\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c14\" colnum=\"14\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c15\" colnum=\"15\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c16\" colnum=\"16\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c17\" colnum=\"17\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c18\" colnum=\"18\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredator Species\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey Species*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"16\" nameend=\"c18\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of consumptions\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;standard error\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"16\" nameend=\"c18\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDays**\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c17\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.16\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.23\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.34\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;18.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c17\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.16\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.16\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.69\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c17\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.84\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.46\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c17\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.38\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41.82\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.78\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c17\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.40\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.29\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.24\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.48\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c17\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.40\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.35\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.46\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.68\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.63\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.57\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c17\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e*1. \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e 2. \u003cem\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e**\u003c/em\u003eHere, Days correspond to the developmental instars as follows: \u003cb\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/b\u003e: first instar (Days 1\u0026ndash;3), second instar (Days 4\u0026ndash;7), third instar (Days 8\u0026ndash;11), fourth instar (Days 11\u0026ndash;16); \u003cb\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/b\u003e: first instar (Days 1\u0026ndash;2), second instar (Days 2\u0026ndash;4), third instar (Days 4\u0026ndash;6), fourth instar (Days 7\u0026ndash;9); \u003cb\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/b\u003e: first instar (Days 1\u0026ndash;4), second instar (Days 5\u0026ndash;7), third instar (Days 8\u0026ndash;11), fourth instar (Days 12\u0026ndash;16).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredation Efficiency in the development stages of predator species (values are expressed in (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredator species\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInstar-wise predation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1st instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2nd instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3rd instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4th instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34.30\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e146.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e216.36\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.38\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.58\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.10\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e132.46\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e201.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.67\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.39\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41.69\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e81.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e142.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.75\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.23\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e84.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e140.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.88\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.40\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e125.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.90\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29.30\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0. 58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e74.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e128.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.41​\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePredation efficiency of adult beetles\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAphid consumption by adult beetles over three consecutive days revealed significant species-specific differences in predatory performance \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e. Among the three coccinellid species, \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e consistently consumed the highest number of aphids across all days and both prey types. On \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e, its consumption ranged from 65.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.58 to 68.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.15 aphids per day, followed by \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e (48.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.39 to 59.77\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.40) and \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e (30.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.66 to 45.64\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;12.33). A similar trend was observed for \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e, where \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e outperformed the other species (43.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.40 to 51.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.63), followed closely by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, while \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e consumed the least. Additionally, higher standard deviations (SD) observed in C. sanguinea indicate greater variability in feeding behavior.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey consumption rates of adult predators (values are expressed in Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredator species\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDay-wise Predation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e68.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e68.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e202.34\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.16\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e143.09\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.15\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49.55\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.77\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e157.99\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.83\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41.06\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e136.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.59\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.85\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;10.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45.64\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;12.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e112.22\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;9.70\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.34\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.42\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;12.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.45\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e81.21\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.86\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAssessment of Predatory Behavior and Host Specificity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe assessment of predatory behavior and host specificity across larval and adult stages revealed apparent interspecific differences among the three coccinellid beetle species. The figure indicates that nosh rate of the larva of all the three species increases with the increase in ages. That means the gradual growing of the larvae. The graph strongly evident that larvae of \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e is a strong predator. It consumed almost 150 aphids within 9 days while it took 16 days in case of \u003cem\u003eC. tansversalis\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e consume less than 150 within 16 days. The total feeding rate of bean aphid during the larval life (i.e. from 1st instar to 4th instar) \u003cem\u003eof C.tansversalis, M. sexmacultus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e was 217.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.52, 142.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.72 and 125.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.00 respectively \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eFig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003ea\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e. The complete scoffing of brinjal aphid fom1st instar upto pre-pupal day of \u003cem\u003eC.tansversalis, M. sexmacultus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e was 195.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.00, 140.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.88 and 135.69\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.30. But fostering of brinjal aphid by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmacultus\u003c/em\u003e larve throughout its entire larval period that\u0026acute;s upto 9th days was 140.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.88 which is transcendental than \u003cem\u003eC.tansversalis and C. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e which was 48.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.13 and 37.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.34 respectively \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eFig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eb\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e. In the feeding preference of beetle, comparative consumption of bean aphid was higher than brinjal aphid in all the three species.No. of bean aphid (420) and brinjal aphid (347) consumption by \u003cem\u003eC.tansversalis\u003c/em\u003e varies significantly. Bean and brinjal aphid consumption by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e also shows significantly different and in bean the no. was (310) and in brinjal (280). Aphid consumption on both host doesn\u0026acute;t show significantly different in case of \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea.\u003c/em\u003e The graph evidents that preying capacity of C.tansversalis was higher followed by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmacultus\u003c/em\u003e and then \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eFig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003ec\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn stage-wise comparison, \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e consistently showed the highest aphid consumption across both larval and adult stages, indicating a strong predatory capacity and broad host acceptance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn larvae, total aphid consumption was highest for \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e (bean aphid: 216.36\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.38; brinjal aphid: 201.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.67), followed by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e (142.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.72, 140.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.88) and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e (125.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.90, 128.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.41​), respectively (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). In adult aphid predation was also highest in \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e (202.34\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.16 on \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e, 143.09\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.15 on \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e), followed by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e (157.99\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.83, 136.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.59) and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e (112.22\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;9.70, 81.21\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.86), respectively (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen adjusted for the duration of feeding, \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e consumed significantly more aphids within 9 days 142.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.75 on \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and 140.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.00 on \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e compared to \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e, which required 16 days to consume fewer prey \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, the data indicate that \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e exhibited the most significant and most consistent predatory efficiency against both aphid species. The graphical trends (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) further support these results, showing a marked preference of all species for \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e over \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge-Wise Cumulative Predatory Comparison of larvae (values are expressed in Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePredator species\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge of larvae (day)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCumulative Predation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.14\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;.1.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.29\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e142.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e140.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35.35\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eA. gossypi\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.35\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eFeeding potentiality in Tritrophic interaction\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the study of tri-trophic interaction, all three coccinellid species were found more active and showed peak predation in the first three hours, with \u003cem\u003eC. transversal\u003c/em\u003e being the most voracious, consuming 36.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.01 aphids, followed by \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e (30.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.22) and \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e (16.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.66). Feeding declined by the sixth and ninth hours across species, indicating a clear preference for foraging behaviour early in the feeding period \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eFig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe comparative assessment of predatory potential among \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and C. sanguinea demonstrates apparent interspecific variations in aphid consumption and host preference.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the tested species, \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e emerged as the most voracious predator across all stages, particularly in the fourth instar, reflecting the increasing metabolic demand and body size associated with pupation (Işıkber \u0026amp; Copland 2001). Its cumulative larval consumption exceeded that of other species, with particularly high daily intake during mid-larval development. However, the longer development time (16 days) suggests that while \u003cem\u003eC. transversal\u003c/em\u003e is effective, its predation efficiency per unit time is lower than that of \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e and may not be the most time-efficient option for rapid pest suppression. The findings of feeding behaviour (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) indicate that \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e is the most voracious and efficient adult predator among the three species, with a marked preference and higher predation rate, particularly on \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e demonstrated rapid feeding within a shorter development span, consuming nearly the same number of aphids as \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e in almost half the time. This efficiency, coupled with high consumption during the fourth instar, supports previous observations by Saleem \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2014) and Priyadarshani \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2016), establishing its potential as a fast-acting biocontrol agent. The data also indicate that adult beetles maintain high predation rates, reinforcing their role in post-larval aphid suppression. High adult consumption rates further highlight its potential as a versatile biocontrol agent, capable of suppressing aphid populations at both the larval and adult stages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e, while less aggressive in terms of aphid consumption, maintained a consistent feeding pattern throughout its development. This species may be less efficient in high-density aphid infestations; however, its generalist predation behaviour and ecological adaptability make it valuable in diversified pest management strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross both larval and adult stages, all species consumed more \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e (bean aphids) than \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e (brinjal aphids), likely due to differences in host plant characteristics such as trichome density, surface texture, and chemical composition. This preference aligns with findings by Omkar and Mishra (2005) and Dalin et al. (2008), which highlight plant morphology as a determinant in prey selection by coccinellids. Bean aphids consistently supported higher predation across all three beetle species, possibly due to the plant's relatively smooth surface, higher palatability, and nutritional quality, which facilitate prey detection and handling. Host aphid species also significantly influenced feeding behaviour. \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e consistently supported higher predation rates than \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e, which may reflect differences in aphid size, nutritional quality, or defensive behaviour. Comparative studies by Bukero et al. (2014) and Prabhakar and Roy (2010) similarly concluded that prey suitability strongly affects predator efficiency, development, and overall biocontrol potential. Variations in food conversion efficiency and relative growth rate among larval instars (Jalali et al.2009) also help explain fluctuations in feeding performance. Similar trends were reported by Finlayson et al. (2010), who observed that aphid consumption varied significantly among four lady beetle species, influenced by factors such as predator size, prey toxicity, and beetle nativity. Collectively, this highlights that host plant-mediated aphid suitability is a key factor in optimising predator effectiveness. The tritrophic interaction complexity arises from the host plant's influence on the nutritional quality of aphid prey. The suitability of aphids from various host plants differed for the same species of ladybird beetle (Wu \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2009).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe observed diurnal activity pattern, with feeding rates peaking in the first three hours, suggests that early-day release of predators in field biocontrol programs may enhance aphid suppression. Similar findings by Işıkber (2005) support this behaviour, linking early-day predation to metabolic compensation and reproductive readiness.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe comparative evaluation of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCheilomenes sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e revealed distinct strengths among the three predatory coccinellids. \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e demonstrated the highest total predation particularly during its later larval stages capacity (216.36\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.38 \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and 201.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.67 \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e were consumed at 4th instar), indicating strong potential for sustained aphid suppression. \u003cem\u003eM. sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e exhibited superior time efficiency and fast action, which are critical in situations requiring immediate pest control. \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e, though less aggressive, maintained consistent predation and may be valuable in diversified biocontrol approaches. These findings underscore the significance of species-specific roles in aphid management and advocate for their incorporation into ecologically sound, IPM-based strategies. Further field-based studies are needed to validate their performance under variable agroecological conditions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eConflict of interest statement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding Declaration\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research work was carried out by the fund of National Science and Technology (NST) Fellowship, FY-2017-2018, Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangladesh.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eMost Shirina\u0026nbsp; Akter: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing - original draft **. Md. Habibur Rahman:** Supervision. **Mohammad Atikur Rahman:** Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing - review \u0026amp;amp; editing. **Md. Roushon Jamal: Writing** - review \u0026amp;amp; editing. **S. M. Hemayet Jahan:** Data curation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing - review \u0026amp;amp; editing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe thank the Lab Technical of Department of Entomology, Patuakhali Science and Technology for helping us to mass rear of Ladybird beetles and aphids. This research work was carried out by the fund of National Science and Technology (NST) Fellowship, Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangladesh.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhmad ME, Nawal D, Kumari M, Kumari K (2024) Prey and host records of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella\u003c/em\u003e spp. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) in India (A review). J Adv Zool 45(5): 170\u0026ndash;187. https://doi.org/10.53555/jaz.v45i5.4738\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhmed MT, Miah MRU, Amin MR, Hossain MM, Suh SJ, Kwon YJ (2019) Plant material as an alternative tool for management of aphid in country bean field. Int J Pest Manag 65(2): 171\u0026ndash;176. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2018.1494864\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAli A, Rizvi PQ (2007) Development and predatory performance of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e L. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on different aphid species. J Biol Sci 7(8): 1478\u0026ndash;1483. https://doi.org/10.3923/jbs.2007.1478.1483\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAli A, Rizvi PQ (2011) Screening of different cultivars of rapeseed-mustard against mustard aphid, \u003cem\u003eLipaphis erysimi\u003c/em\u003e Kaltenbach with respect to sowing dates. Asian J Plant Sci 10(8): 383\u0026ndash;392. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2011.383.392\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAli A, Rizvi PQ, Pathak M (2009) Reproductive performance of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e Fabricius (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on different aphid species. Biosystematica 3(1): 37\u0026ndash;41.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAshraf M, Ishtiaq M, Asif M, Adrees M, Ayub MN, Mehmood T, Awan MN (2010) A study on laboratory rearing of lady bird beetle (\u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e) to observe its fecundity and longevity on natural and artificial diets. Int J Biol 2(1): 165\u0026ndash;172. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijb.v2n1p165\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBajracharya S, Budha PB, Baral S (2023) Feeding efficiency of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e Linnaeus and \u003cem\u003ePropylea luteopustulata\u003c/em\u003e (Mulsant) against mustard aphid, \u003cem\u003eLipaphis erysimi\u003c/em\u003e (Kaltenbach). Nepalese J Zool 7(1): 1\u0026ndash;6. https://doi.org/10.3126/njz.v7i1.56304\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBellows T (2001) Restoring population balance through natural enemy introductions. Biol Control 21(3): 199\u0026ndash;205. https://doi.org/10.1006/bcon.2001.0936\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBukero A, Lanjar AG, Solangi AW, Memon AA, Thebo G, Nahyo SA, Buriro RA (2014) Voracity rate and development period of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e (Fabricius) on three aphid species. Sci Int (Lahore) 26(5): 2255\u0026ndash;2257.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChowdhury SP, Ahad MA, Amin MR, Hasan MS (2008a) Biology of ladybird beetle, \u003cem\u003eMicraspis discolor\u003c/em\u003e (Fab.) (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera). Int J Sustain Crop Prod 3(3): 39\u0026ndash;44.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChowdhury SP, Ahad MA, Amin MR, Rasel NA (2008b) Bean aphid predation efficiency of lady bird beetle, \u003cem\u003eMicraspis discolor\u003c/em\u003e F. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). J Soil Nat 2(3): 40\u0026ndash;45.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDalin P, \u0026Aring;gren J, Bj\u0026ouml;rkman C, Huttunen P, K\u0026auml;rkk\u0026auml;inen K (2008) Leaf trichome formation and plant resistance to herbivory. In: Schaller J (Ed.) Induced Plant Resistance to Herbivory (pp. 89\u0026ndash;105). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8182-8_4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDe Clercq P, Mason PG, Babendreier D (2011) Benefits and risks of exotic biological control agents. BioControl 56(4): 681\u0026ndash;698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-011-9372-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEvans EW (2000) Egg production in response to combined alternative foods by the predator \u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e. Entomol Exp Appl 94(2): 141\u0026ndash;147. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1570-7458.2000.00614.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFinlayson C, Alyokhin A, Gross S, Porter E (2010) Differential consumption of four aphid species by four lady beetle species. J Insect Sci 10(31): 1\u0026ndash;10. https://doi.org/10.1673/031.010.3101\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolloway GJ, De Jong PW, Brakefield PM, De Vos H (1991) Chemical defence in ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae). I. Distribution of coccinelline and individual variation in defence in 7-spot ladybirds (\u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e). Chemoecology 2(1): 7\u0026ndash;14. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01240660\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIşıkber AA (2005) Functional response of two coccinellid predators, \u003cem\u003eScymnus levaillanti\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e, to the cotton aphid, \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e. Turk J Agric For 29: 347\u0026ndash;355.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIşıkber A, Copland M (2001) Food consumption and utilisation by larvae of two coccinellid predators, \u003cem\u003eScymnus levaillanti\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eCycloneda sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e, on cotton aphid, \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e. BioControl 46(4): 455\u0026ndash;467. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014181920308\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJalali MA, Tirry L, De Clercq P (2009) Food consumption and immature growth of \u003cem\u003eAdalia bipunctata\u003c/em\u003e (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on a natural prey and a factitious food. Eur J Entomol 106(2): 193\u0026ndash;198. https://doi.org/10.14411/eje.2009.024\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKansman JT, Nersten CE, Hermann SL (2023) Smelling danger: Lady beetle odors affect aphid population abundance and feeding, but not movement between plants. Basic Appl Ecol 71: 1\u0026ndash;8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2023.05.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKatsarou I, Margaritopoulos JT, Tsitsipis JA, Perdikis DC, Zarpas KD (2005) Effect of temperature on development, growth and feeding of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eHippodamia convergens\u003c/em\u003e reared on the tobacco aphid, \u003cem\u003eMyzus persicae nicotianae\u003c/em\u003e. BioControl 50(4): 565\u0026ndash;588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-004-2838-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKhan IA, Wan F-H (2015) Comparison of life tables of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e L. and \u003cem\u003eHarmonia axyridis\u003c/em\u003e (Pallas) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) reared on \u003cem\u003eBemisia tabaci\u003c/em\u003e (Gennadius) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) biotype B prey. J Entomol Zool Stud 3(3): 243\u0026ndash;248.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar B, Pandey G, Mishra G, Omkar N (2013) Predatory performance of aphidophagous ladybirds: A measure of prey suitability? Int J Trop Insect Sci 33(2): 120\u0026ndash;126. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742758413000076\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMacedo TB, Bastos CS, Higley LG, Ostlie KR, Madhavan S (2003) Photosynthetic responses of soybean to soybean aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae) injury. J Econ Entomol 96(1): 188\u0026ndash;193. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/96.1.188\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiao J, Wu K, Hopper KR, Li G (2007) Population dynamics of \u003cem\u003eAphis glycines\u003c/em\u003e (Homoptera: Aphididae) and impact of natural enemies in northern China. Environ Entomol 36(4): 840\u0026ndash;848. https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225X\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMishra G, Kumar B, Shahid M, Singh D, Omkar N (2011) Evaluation of four co-occurring ladybirds for use as biocontrol agents of the pea aphid, \u003cem\u003eAcyrthosiphon pisum\u003c/em\u003e (Homoptera: Aphididae). Biocontrol Sci Technol 21(8): 991\u0026ndash;997. https://doi.org/10.1080/09583157.2011.594953\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMishra G, Omkar N, Kumar B, Pandey G (2012) Stage and age-specific predation in four aphidophagous ladybird beetles. Biocontrol Sci Technol 22(4): 463\u0026ndash;476. https://doi.org/10.1080/09583157.2012.664617\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNisa F, Biswas AP, Afroz M, Miah MRU, Hassan J, Rahman MM, Hossain MM, Rahman MM (2024) Molecular characterization of aphid and their mutualistic and antagonistic interactions with co-occurring herbivore in country bean. Discover Agric 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-024-00135-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNorris RH, Silva-Torres CS, Lujan M, Wilson-Rankin EE, Mauck KE (2023) Footprints of predatory lady beetles stimulate increased dispersal of aphid prey, but do not alter feeding behavior or spread of a non-persistently transmitted plant virus. Food Webs 37: e00325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2023.e00325\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOmkar N, Mishra G (2005) Preference\u0026ndash;performance of a generalist predatory ladybird: A laboratory study. Biol Control 34(2): 187\u0026ndash;195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2005.05.007\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePrabhakar AK, Roy SP (2010) Evaluation of the consumption rates of dominant coccinellid predators on aphids in North-East Bihar. The Bioscan 5(3): 491\u0026ndash;493.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePriyadarshani TDC, Hemachandra KS, Sirisena UGAI, Wijayaguasekara HNP (2016) Developmental biology and feeding efficiency of \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) (Fabricius) reared on \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e (Hemiptera: Aphididae) (Koch). Trop Agric Res 27(2): 115\u0026ndash;122. https://doi.org/10.4038/tar.v27i2.8160\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRahman MM, Jarugula S, Bagewadi B, Fayad A, Karasev AV, Naidu RA (2023) Characterization of a new country bean (Lablab purpureus) lineage of Bean Common Mosaic Necrosis Virus. Plant Dis 108(2): 434\u0026ndash;441. https://doi.org/10.1094/pdis-04-23-0822-re\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRain FF, Aslam AFM, Ringki HS, Sultana N, Akter N, Howlader AJ (2016) Coccinellid predators of aphid and their phylogenetic analysis using COI gene sequences. Int J Appl Sci Biotechnol 4(3): 408\u0026ndash;416. https://doi.org/10.3126/ijasbt.v4i3.15782\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRakhshan R, Ahmed E (2018) Effect of host plants on the reproductive aspects of \u003cem\u003eCheilomenes sexmaculata\u003c/em\u003e (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Curr Investig Agric Curr Res 3(5):453\u0026ndash;457. https://doi.org/10.32474/ciacr.2018.03.000175\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRondoni G, Borges I, Collatz J, Conti E, Costamagna AC, Dumont F, et al. (2020) Exotic ladybirds for biological control of herbivorous insects \u0026ndash; a review. Entomol Exp Appl 169(1): 6\u0026ndash;27. https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.12963\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaleem M, Hussain D, Anwar H, Saleem M, Ghouse G, Abbas M (2014) Predation efficacy of \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e Fabricius (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) against \u003cem\u003eMacrosiphum rosae\u003c/em\u003e under laboratory conditions. J Entomol Zool Stud 2(3): 160\u0026ndash;163.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaleem M, Saleem M, Hussain D, Abbas M (2019) Predation efficacy of ladybird beetle (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) against wheat aphid under laboratory conditions. J Entomol Zool Stud 7(4): 709\u0026ndash;712.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSalman AMA, El-Harery MA, El-Solimany EA (2014) Effects of population densities of \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e Koch on predatory efficiency of \u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e L., \u003cem\u003eCoccinella undecimpunctata\u003c/em\u003e L., and \u003cem\u003eChrysoperla carnea\u003c/em\u003e Stephens larvae under laboratory conditions. Middle East J Agric Res 3(1): 116\u0026ndash;122.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSarwar M, Saqib SM (2010) Rearing of predatory seven spotted ladybird beetle, \u003cem\u003eCoccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e L. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on natural and artificial diets under laboratory conditions. Pak J Zool 42(1): 47\u0026ndash;51.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShakeel M, Akram W, Ali A, Ali MW, Nasim W (2014) Frequency of aphid (\u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e G.) on brinjal (\u003cem\u003eSolanum melongena\u003c/em\u003e L.) and farming practices in the agroclimatic conditions of Faisalabad, Pakistan. Int J Agric Innov Res 2(5): 841\u0026ndash;842.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSharmin MA, Amin MR, Miah MRU, Akanda AM (2021) Seasonal dynamics of bean aphids and its relationship with the abundance of lady bird beetles. Bangladesh J Zool 48(2): 357\u0026ndash;363. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjz.v48i2.52375\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSheela N, Shinde CU (2019) Predatory potential of spotted ladybird beetle \u003cem\u003eHarmonia octomaculata\u003c/em\u003e (Fabricius) (Coccinellidae: Coleoptera) on lucerne aphid \u003cem\u003eAcyrthosiphon pisum\u003c/em\u003e (Harris) (Aphididae: Hemiptera) under laboratory conditions. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 8(9): 832\u0026ndash;838. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.809.100\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith CM, Boyko EV (2006) The molecular bases of plant resistance and defense responses to aphid feeding: Current status. Entomol Exp Appl 122(1): 1\u0026ndash;16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1570-7458.2006.00503.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSolangi BK, Hullio MH, Baloch N (2007) Biological parameters and prey consumption by zigzag beetle \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e Fab. against \u003cem\u003eRhopalosiphum maidis\u003c/em\u003e Fitch, \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e Glov., and \u003cem\u003eTherioaphis trifolii\u003c/em\u003e Monell. Sarhad J Agric 23(4): 1097\u0026ndash;1110.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWu P, He J, Ge Y, Liu Z, Zhang R (2023) Comparison of predatory performance among three ladybird species, \u003cem\u003eHarmonia axyridis, Coccinella septempunctata\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eHippodamia variegata\u003c/em\u003e, feeding on goji berry psyllid, \u003cem\u003eBactericera gobica\u003c/em\u003e. Insects 15(1): 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15010019\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWu X, Zhou X, Pang B (2009) Influence of five host plants of \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e Glover on some population parameters of \u003cem\u003eHippodamia variegata\u003c/em\u003e (Goeze). J Pest Sci 83(2): 77\u0026ndash;83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-009-0272\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-journal-of-tropical-insect-science","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"jtis","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Journal of Tropical Insect Science](http://link.springer.com/journal/42690)","snPcode":"42690","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/jtis/default2.aspx","title":"International Journal of Tropical Insect Science","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Aphid, Biological control, predation efficiency, Coccinella transversalis, Menochilus sexmaculatus, Cheilomenes sanguinea, Aphis craccivora, Aphis gossypii","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7793888/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7793888/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eAphids (\u003cem\u003eAphis spp.\u003c/em\u003e) are significant pests in agriculture, and the use of ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae) as biological control agents offers a sustainable alternative to chemical pesticides. However, their predation efficiency in coastal agroecosystems remains underexplored. This study evaluated the predation efficiency of three coccinellid species-\u003cem\u003eCoccinella transversalis\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eCheilomenes sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e against \u003cem\u003eAphis craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eAphis gossypii\u003c/em\u003e under controlled laboratory conditions (21\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4\u0026deg;C; 67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1% RH). Larvae were individually placed in Petri dishes with three replicates per species, and aphid consumption was recorded across all larval stages and adult beetles. \u003cem\u003eMenochilus sexmaculatus\u003c/em\u003e exhibited rapid development and consumed comparable aphid numbers in a shorter period (consumed 37.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.0 \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e and 41.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.0 \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e by 4th instar of beetle on day 8), indicating high early-stage efficiency. \u003cem\u003eC. sanguinea\u003c/em\u003e consumed fewer aphids overall (consumed 19.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.3 \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e, 18.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.7 \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e by 4th instar of beetle on day 15), but showed consistent feeding across stages, suggesting potential for sustained control. \u003cem\u003eC. transversalis\u003c/em\u003e demonstrated the highest total consumption (consumed 55.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;18.5 \u003cem\u003eA. craccivora\u003c/em\u003e, 46.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.7 \u003cem\u003eA. gossypii\u003c/em\u003e by 4th instar of beetle on days 13\u0026ndash;14), supporting its role as a long-term biocontrol agent. These results highlight the species-specific predation efficiencies of coccinellids and support their integration into ecologically based pest management programs. Field validation is recommended to assess performance under variable coastal conditions.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"In Vitro Predation Efficiency of Ladybird Beetles as a Biocontrol Agent on Aphids Available in Bangladesh Coast","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-11 13:34:26","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7793888/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-19T08:56:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-02-20T04:48:28+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"70940241888044815710275543430325467291","date":"2026-02-10T10:24:25+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-02-09T12:52:07+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-10-09T04:06:53+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-10-09T04:06:42+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"International Journal of Tropical Insect Science","date":"2025-10-06T19:12:25+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-journal-of-tropical-insect-science","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"jtis","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Journal of Tropical Insect Science](http://link.springer.com/journal/42690)","snPcode":"42690","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/jtis/default2.aspx","title":"International Journal of Tropical Insect Science","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"733b54ff-598c-4c72-aff3-93700f0e26f8","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 11th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-05-19T08:56:24+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"in-revision","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-19T09:10:25+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-11 13:34:26","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7793888","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7793888","identity":"rs-7793888","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}