【目的】 比较不同颜色（黄、蓝、白）水盆诱捕器对枣叶瘿蚊Dasineura jujubifolia成虫的诱捕效果以及对天敌昆虫的误伤风险，探索枣叶瘿蚊监测和物理防治的新方法。【方法】 2022和2025年，在新疆维吾尔自治区阿克苏地区枣园采用不同颜色水盆诱捕器监测了枣叶瘿蚊及天敌昆虫的成虫种群动态，比较了不同颜色诱捕器对枣叶瘿蚊及天敌昆虫诱捕数量的差异，采用天敌与枣叶瘿蚊成虫数量的比值（选择性比）评估对天敌昆虫的潜在生态影响。【结果】 通过两年对枣叶瘿蚊成虫的监测，发现枣叶瘿蚊种群存在明显的季节性动态，越冬代成虫主要发生在5月初，第一代成虫高峰期主要在5月中下旬。黄色诱捕器诱捕枣叶瘿蚊成虫数量显著多于其它两种颜色的诱捕器（P < 0.001），2022年黄色诱捕器诱捕到越冬代高峰数量[（130.00±67.66）头/诱捕器]约为其它两种颜色诱捕数量[蓝色：（14.67±8.72）头/诱捕器；白色：（11.67±3.47）头/诱捕器]的9倍，第一代高峰数量[（139.67±34.00）头/诱捕器]约为其它两种颜色诱捕数量[蓝色：（24.33±1.91）头/诱捕器；白色：（10.67±1.52）头/诱捕器]的7倍；2025年黄色诱捕器诱捕到越冬代高峰数量[（81.40±25.55）头/诱捕器]约为其它两种颜色诱捕数量[（蓝色：14.00±6.94头/诱捕器；白色：28.20±8.45头/诱捕器）]的4倍，第一代高峰数量[（98.75±32.51头/诱捕器）]约为其它两种颜色诱捕数量[蓝色：（8.33±1.91）头/诱捕器；白色：（15.33±6.28）头/诱捕器]的8倍。捕食性天敌（草蛉、瓢虫）数量在3种颜色间无显著差异（草蛉：P = 0.305；瓢虫：P = 0.580），黄色诱捕器诱捕到寄生蜂数量多于其它两种颜色（P < 0.001）。黄色诱捕器对草蛉（P < 0.001）和瓢虫（P = 0.002）的选择性比均显著低于其它两种颜色，对寄生蜂的选择性比在不同颜色间无显著差异（P = 0.112）。【结论】 黄色水盆诱捕器诱捕枣叶瘿蚊成虫效果最好，对天敌昆虫误伤风险较低，可用于枣叶瘿蚊的监测及物理防治。

 [Aim]  To compare the effectiveness of different colored (yellow, blue, white) pan traps for trapping the adult jujube gall midges (Dasineura jujubifolia) and their by-catch of the natural enemies of plant pests, thereby optimizing the available methods for the monitoring and physical control of this pest. [Methods]  In 2022 and 2025, yellow, blue and white pan traps were deployed in jujube orchards in Aksu, Xinjiang to monitor the population dynamics of adult midges and their natural enemies, after which the performance of the different colored traps were compared. The ratio of midges to their natural enemies was calculated to assess the potential ecological impact of yellow, blue and white traps on beneficial species. [Results]  Distinct seasonal dynamics were observed over the two years of the study. Overwintering adults peaked in early May and the first generation peaked in mid-to-late May. Yellow traps captured significantly more adult midges than the other colored traps (P < 0.001). In 2022, the average peak capture of overwintering adults in yellow traps [ (130.00 ± 67.66) ind./trap ]was approximately nine times higher than that in blue [(14.67 ± 8.72) ind./trap], or white [(11.67 ± 3.47) ind./trap], traps. The maximum number of the first generation captured in yellow traps [(139.67 ± 34.00) ind./ trap] was approximately 7 times higher than was captured in blue [(24.33 ± 1.91) ind./ trap], or white[ (3.56 ± 0.65) ind./ trap], traps. In 2025, the peak number of overwintering individuals captured in yellow traps [(81.40 ± 25.55 )ind./ trap)] was approximately four times that captured in blue[ (14.00 ± 6.94) ind./ trap], or white [(28.20 ± 8.45 )ind./ trap], traps. Peak abundance of the first generation captured in yellow traps [(35.91 ± 7.80) ind./ trap] was about 8 times that captured in blue[ (8.33 ± 1.91) ind./ trap], or white[ (15.33 ± 6.28) ind./ trap], traps. There was no significant difference in the number of predatory natural enemies (lacewings, ladybugs) captured by the different colored traps (lacewings: P = 0.305; ladybugs: P = 0.580), however, yellow traps captured significantly more parasitic wasps than the blue or white traps (P < 0.001). Yellow pan traps had significantly lower selectivity ratios for lacewings (P < 0.001), and ladybugs (P = 0.002) compared to the other two colors. There were no significant differences in selectivity ratios for parasitic wasps among the three trap colors (P = 0.112). [Conclusion]  Yellow pan traps capture significantly more adult jujube gall midges than blue, or white, traps, and also capture fewer of their natural enemies.