Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T19:12:19.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Distinguishing suitable biotypes of Dactylopius tomentosus (Hemiptera: Dactylopiidae) for biological control of Cylindropuntia fulgida var. fulgida (Caryophyllales: Cactaceae) in South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2009

C.W. Mathenge ,
P. Holford ,
J.H. Hoffmann ,
H.G. Zimmermann ,
R. Spooner-Hart  and
G.A.C. Beattie
C.W. Mathenge
Affiliation:
Zoology Department, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, Cape Town, South Africa Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Council, Private Bag X134, Pretoria 0001, South Africa Centre for Plant and Food Science, University of Western Sydney (Hawkesbury Campus), Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 1797, Australia
P. Holford*
Affiliation:
Centre for Plant and Food Science, University of Western Sydney (Hawkesbury Campus), Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 1797, Australia
J.H. Hoffmann
Affiliation:
Zoology Department, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, Cape Town, South Africa
H.G. Zimmermann
Affiliation:
Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Council, Private Bag X134, Pretoria 0001, South Africa
R. Spooner-Hart
Affiliation:
Centre for Plant and Food Science, University of Western Sydney (Hawkesbury Campus), Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 1797, Australia
G.A.C. Beattie
Affiliation:
Centre for Plant and Food Science, University of Western Sydney (Hawkesbury Campus), Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC, NSW 1797, Australia
*
*Author for correspondence Fax: +61 2 4570 1314 E-mail: p.holford@uws.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cylindropuntia fulgida (Engelmann) F.M. Knuth var. fulgida (Engelmann) F.M. Knuth (Cff) (Caryophyllales: Cactaceae) is native to Mexico and Arizona and was introduced into South Africa for ornamental purposes. It subsequently became highly invasive, necessitating control. The cochineal insect, Dactylopius tomentosus (Lamarck) (Hemiptera: Dactylopiidae), was selected as a potential biological control agent based on its restricted host range among Cylindropuntia species and previous success in controlling C. imbricata (DC.) F. Knuth (Ci). Eight D. tomentosus provenances (Cholla, Cholla E, Fulgida, Mamillata, Imbricata, Tunicata U, Tunicata V and Rosea) from Cylindropuntia species in their native ranges were reared on Cff, whilst Cholla and Imbricata were also reared on Ci. Large differences were found in the development and survival of crawlers, and in the reproductive capacity of females. Three subjective categories of provenance interaction with host plants were identified based on a fitness index (FI) calculated from data relating to crawler survival, female development time and fecundity: (i) thriving (FI≥1) – insects had shorter developmental times, high crawler survival and highly fecund females (Cholla); (ii) surviving (FI<1 but >0) – insects had extended development times, low crawler survival and low fecundity (Imbricata, Fulgida and Mamillata); and (iii) dying (FI=0) – insects died before or at the second instar (Rosea, Tunicata U and Tunicata V). Cholla, therefore, is highly suitable for biological control of Cff in South Africa. In addition, Cholla thrived on Cff but only survived on Ci whilst, in contrast, Imbricata thrived on Ci but only survived on Cff. This differential ability of provenances to thrive or survive on different host plants demonstrated that host adapted biotypes of D. tomentosus exist; therefore, biotypes should be taken into account when considering this species as a biological control agent of cactus weeds.

Keywords

cochineal provenancescactus weedshost specificitybiological control
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 99 , Issue 6 , December 2009 , pp. 619 - 627
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alstad, D. (1998) Population structure and the conundrum of local adaptation. pp. 3–21in Mopper, S. & Strauss, S. (Eds) Genetic Variation and Local Adaptation in Natural Insect Populations: Effects of Ecology, Life History, and Behaviour. New York, Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Anderson, E. (2001) The Cactus Family. 776 pp. Portland, OR, Timber Press.Google Scholar
Benson, L. (1982) The Cacti of the United States and Canada. 1044 pp. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bravo-Hollis, H. (1978) Las Cáctaceas de Mexico. 743 pp. Mexico D.F., Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.Google Scholar
Briese, D.T. (2004) Weed biological control: applying science to solve seemingly intractable problems. Australian Journal of Entomology 43, 304–317.Google Scholar
Briese, D.T., Pettit, W.J. & Walker, A. (2004) Evaluation of the biological control agent, Lixus cardui, on Onopordum thistles: experimental studies on agent demography and impact. Biological Control 31, 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caillaud, M.C. & Via, S. (2000) Specialized feeding behavior influences both ecological specialization and assortative mating in sympatric host races of pea aphids. The American Naturalist 156, 606–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke, A.R. & Walter, G.H. (1995) ‘Strains’ and the classical biological control of insect pests. Canadian Journal of Zoology 73, 1777–1790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, J.M. (1987) Pseudococcidae (Insecta: Hemiptera). Fauna of New Zealand 11, 230 pp. Auckland, New Zealand, DSIR Plant Protection.Google Scholar
De Beer, H. (1986a) Rosea cactus. Farming in South Africa. Weeds A. 13. Pretoria, South Africa, Government Printer.Google Scholar
De Beer, H. (1986b) Imbricate cactus. Farming in South Africa. Weeds A. 14. Pretoria, South Africa, Government Printer.Google Scholar
De Lotto, G. (1974) On the status and identity of the cochineal insects (Homoptera: Coccoidea: Dactylopiidae). Journal of the Entomological Society of Southern Africa 37, 167–193.Google Scholar
Diehl, S.R. & Bush, G.L. (1984) An evolutionary and applied perspective of insect biotypes. Annual Review of Entomology 29, 471–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drès, M. & Mallet, J. (2002) Host races in plant-feeding insects and their importance in sympatric speciation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B 357, 471–492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Githure, C.W., Zimmermann, H.G. & Hoffmann, J.H. (1999) Host specificity of biotypes of Dactylopius opuntiae (Cockerell) (Hemiptera: Dactylopiidae): prospects for biological control of Opuntia stricta (Haworth) Haworth (Cactaceae) in Africa. African Entomology 7, 43–48.Google Scholar
Godínez-Álvarez, H., Valverde, T. & Ortega-Baes, P. (2003) Demographic trends in the Cactaceae. The Botanical Review 69, 173–203.Google Scholar
Guerra, G.P. & Kosztarab, M. (1992) Biosystematics of the family Dactylopiidae (Homoptera: Coccineae) with emphasis on the life cycle of Dactylopius coccus Costa: studies on the morphology and systematics of scale insects, No. 16. Bulletin No. 92-1. Blacksburg, Virginia, Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.Google Scholar
Henderson, L. (1995) Plant invaders of southern Africa. Handbook No. 5. 177 pp. Pretoria, South Africa, Plant Protection Research Institute.Google Scholar
Henderson, L. (2001) Alien weeds and invasive plants: a complete guide to declared weeds and invaders in South Africa. Handbook No. 12. 300 pp. Roodeplaat, South Africa, ARC, Plant Protection Research Institute.Google Scholar
Henderson, L. & Zimmermann, H.G. (2003) Chainfruit cholla (Opuntia fulgida Engelm.) misidentified as rosea cactus (Opuntia rosea DC.) in South Africa. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 20, 46–47.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, J.H., Impson, F.A.C. & Volchansky, C.R. (2002) Biological control of cactus weeds: implications of hybridization between control agent biotypes. Journal of Applied Ecology 39, 900–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hokkanen, H.M.T. & Pimentel, D. (1984) New approach for selecting biological control agents. Canadian Entomologist 116, 1109–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hokkanen, H.M.T. & Pimentel, D. (1989) New associations in biological control: theory and practice. Canadian Entomologist 121, 829–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hosking, J.R. (1984) The effect of temperature on the population growth potential of Dactylopius austrinus De Lotto (Homoptera: Dactylopiidae), on Opuntia aurantiaca Lindley. Australian Journal of Entomology 23, 133–139.Google Scholar
Jaenike, J. (1981) Criteria for ascertaining the existence of host races. American Naturalist 117, 830–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julien, M.H. & Griffiths, M.W. (1999) Biological Control of Weeds: A World Catalogue of Agents and their Target Weeds. 186 pp. Wallingford, UK, CAB International.Google Scholar
Mathenge, C.W., Holford, P., Hoffmann, J., Spooner-Hart, R., Beattie, G.A.C. & Zimmermann, H.G.The biology of Dactylopius tomentosus (Hemiptera: Dactylopiidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, in press (doi: 10.1017/S0007485308006597).Google Scholar
Malan, D.E. & Zimmermann, H.G. (1988) Chemical control of Opuntia imbricata (Han.) DC and Opuntia rosea DC. Applied Plant Science 2, 13–16.Google Scholar
Miller, D.R. & Kosztarab, M. (1979) Recent advances in the study of scale insects. Annual Review of Entomology 24, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mopper, S. & Strauss, S. (1998) Genetic Structure and Local Adaptation in Natural Insect Populations: Effects of Ecology, Life History, and Behaviour. 449 pp. New York, Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, V.C. (1980) Interactions between phytophagous insects and their Opuntia hosts. Ecolological Entomology 5, 153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, V.C. (1981) Belated kudos for cochineal insects. Antenna 5, 54–58.Google Scholar
Moran, V.C. & Cobby, B.S. (1979) On the life history and fecundity of the cochineal insect, Dactylopius austrinus De Lotto (Homoptera: Dactylopiidae), a biocontrol agent for the cactus Opuntia aurantiaca. Bulletin of Entomological Research 69, 629–636.Google Scholar
Moran, V.C. & Zimmermann, H.G. (1984a) The biological control of cactus weeds: achievements and prospects. Biocontrol News and Information 5, 297–320.Google Scholar
Moran, V.C. & Zimmermann, H.G. (1984b) The biological control of cactaceae: success ratings and the contribution of individual agent species. pp. 69–75in Delfosse, E.S. (Ed.) Proceedings of the VI Symposium of Biological Control of Weeds. Agriculture Canada, University of British Columbia, 19–25 September 1984, Vancouver, BC, Canada.Google Scholar
Moran, V.C. & Zimmermann, H.G. (1991) Biological control of cactus weeds of minor importance in South Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 37, 37–55.Google Scholar
Plant Protection Research Institute (2007) Plant protection news, No. 73. Pretoria, South Africa, PPRI.Google Scholar
Portillos, M.L. & Vigueras, A.L. (2006) A review of the cochineal species in Mexico, hosts and natural enemies. Acta Horticulturae 728, 249–255.Google Scholar
Rebman, J.P. (1995) Biosystematics of Opuntia subgenus Cylindropuntia (Cactaceae), the chollas of lower California, Mexico. PhD dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.Google Scholar
Rebman, J.P. & Pinkava, D.J. (2001). Opuntia cacti of north America – an overview. Florida Entomologist 84, 474–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez, L.C., Méndez, M.A. & Niemeyer, H.M. (2001) Direction of dispersal of cochineal (Dactylopius coccus Costa) within the Americas. Antiquity 75, 73–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, A.W., Hodge, P., Paynter, Q. & Rees, M. (2002) Factors affecting invasion and persistence of broom Cytisus scoparius in Australia. Journal of Applied Ecology 39, 721–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snee, R.D. (1974) Graphical display of two-way contingency tables. American Naturalist 28, 9–12.Google Scholar
Spitzer, B. (2006) Local maladaptation in the soft scale insect Saissetia coffeae (Hemiptera: Coccidae). Evolution 60, 1859–1867.Google ScholarPubMed
Via, S. (1991) Specialized host plant performance of pea aphid clones is not altered by experience. Ecology 72, 1420–1427.Google Scholar
Volchansky, C.R. (2000) Interbreeding between two biotypes of Dactylopius opuntiae (Homoptera: Dactylopiidae): implications for biological control of Opuntia stricta and Opuntia ficus-indica (Cactaceae) in South Africa. MSc thesis. University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.Google Scholar
Volchansky, C.R., Hoffmann, J.H. & Zimmermann, H.G. (1999) Host-plant affinities of two biotypes of Dactylopius opuntiae (Homoptera: Dactylopiidae): enhanced prospects for biological control of Opuntia stricta (Cactaceae) in South Africa. Journal of Applied Ecology 36, 85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, R.S. & Gibson, A.C. (2002) Evolution and systematics. pp. 235–254in Nobel, P.S. (Ed.) Cacti: Biology and Uses. Berkeley, CA, University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wapshere, A.J. (1974) Host-specificity of phytophagous organisms and the evolutionary centres of plant genera or sub-genera. Entomophaga 19, 301–309.Google Scholar
Williams, D.J. & Granara de Willink, M.C. (1992) Mealybugs of Central and South America. pp. 635. Wallingford, UK, Commonwealth Science Council and CAB International.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, H.G. (1978) Opuntia rosea DC. pp. 166in Stirton, C.H. (Ed.) Plant Invaders: Beautiful but Dangerous. Cape Town, South Africa, The Department of Nature and Environmental Conservation of the Cape Provincial Administration.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, H.G. & Granata, G. (2002) Insect pests and diseases. pp. 235–254in Nobel, P.S. (Ed.) Cacti: Biology and Uses. Berkeley, CA, University of California Press.Google Scholar
Zwölfer, H. & Romstöck-Völkl, M. (1991) Biotypes and the evolution of niches in phytophagous insects on Cardueae hosts. pp. 487–507in Price, P.W., Lewinsohn, T.M., Fernandes, G.W. & Benson, W.W. (Eds) Plant-Animal Interactions: Evolutionary Ecology in Tropical and Temperate Regions. New York, Wiley.Google Scholar