Skip to main content Accessibility help

Host suitability of Trichoplusia ni and Chrysodeixis chalcites (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) for native and nonnative parasitoids expanding their host range

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2020

Henry Murillo Pacheco
Centro Iberoamericano de la Biodiversidad (CIBIO), Parque Científico, Universidad de Alicante, 03690, San Vicente del Raspeig, Alicante, Spain
Sherah Vanlaerhoven
Department of Biological Science, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, Ontario, N9B 3P4, Canada
M. Angeles Marcos Garcia
Centro Iberoamericano de la Biodiversidad (CIBIO), Parque Científico, Universidad de Alicante, 03690, San Vicente del Raspeig, Alicante, Spain
E-mail address:


We evaluated the host suitability and related traits of Trichoplusia ni Hübner (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Chrysodeixis chalcites Esper (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), which is nonnative in North America, for the native parasitoids Campoletis sonorensis Cameron (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) and Copidosoma floridanum Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), and the nonnative parasitoid Cotesia vanessae Reinhard (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). For the larval parasitoid C. sonorensis and C. vanessae trials, three-day-old larvae of both hosts were used, whereas one-day-old eggs of both hosts were used for the egg–larval parasitoid C. floridanum trial. For suitability parameters on each host exposed separately to each of the three parasitoid species, we measured parasitoid emergence (parasitoid success), parasitoids that did not emerge (parasitoid cocoon mortality), the proportion of male offspring (parasitoid sex ratio), hosts that developed into moths (host success), hosts that died without developing into moths or producing a parasitoid (host mortality), parasitoids emerging from cocoon masses (brood size), and the developmental times of parasitoids and hosts. For C. sonorensis, the native host and the nonnative host were found to be similarly suitable. For C. vanessae, the native host was more suitable than the nonnative host. For C. floridanum, the native host was suitable, whereas the nonnative host was not; however, sublethal effects on both the native and nonnative hosts were observed. The differential suitability of the hosts observed in this study contributes to the understanding of this measure as a dynamic factor in the expansion of parasitoids into novel host species.

Research Papers
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Entomological Society of Canada

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.


Present address: 42 Hazel Crescent, Kingsville, Ontario, N9Y 0B1, Canada.

Subject editor: John Wise


Agosta, S.J. and Klemens, J.A. 2008. Ecological fitting by phenotypically flexible genotypes: implications for species associations, community assembly and evolution. Ecology Letters, 11: 11231134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Araya, J.E., Machuca, J.R., and Arretz, P. 1989. Presencia de Campoletis sonorensis (Cameron, 1886) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) en Chile. Acta Entomologica Chilena, 15: 269270.Google Scholar
Asgari, S. and Rivers, D.B. 2011. Venom proteins from endoparasitoid wasps and their role in host–parasite interactions. Annual Review of Entomology, 56: 313335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Askew, R.R. and Shaw, M.R. 1986. Parasitoid communities: their size, structure and development. In Insect Parasitoids. Edited by Waage, J.K. and Greathead, D.. Academic Press, London, United Kingdom. Pp. 225–264.Google Scholar
Bloemhard, C. and Messelink, G. 2005. Biologische bestrijding van rupsen in kasteelten Opsporen en toetsing van parasitoïden van schadelijke rupsen in kasteelten met paprika. Praktijkonderzoek Plant & Omgeving B.V. Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Boivin, G. and Brodeur, J. 2006. Intra- and interspecific interactions among parasitoids: mechanisms, outcomes and biological control. In Trophic and Guild in Biological Interactions Control. Progress in Biological Control, volume 3. Edited by Brodeur, J. and Boivin, G.. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bosque, J.L., Figueras, M., and Izquierdo, J. 1996. Parasitismo sobre Plusiinae (Lepidóptera: Noctuidae) en tomate. Boletín de Sanidad vegetal. Plagas, 22: 683692.Google Scholar
Camargo, L.F., Brito, R.A., and Penteado-Dias, A.M. 2015. Redescription of Campoletis sonorensis (Cameron, 1886) (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae, Campopleginae), parasitoid of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) in Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, 75: 989998.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International. 2007. Campoletis sonorensis . Crop Protection Compendium. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International. 2020. Chrysodeixis chalrefs (golden twin-spot moth) [online]. Invasive Species Compendium. Wallingford, United Kingdom. Available from [accessed 28 July 2020].Google Scholar
Center for Plant Health Science and Technology. 2013. Chrysodeixis chalrefs [online]. Available from [accessed 19 January 2020].Google Scholar
Charnov, E.L. and Skinner, S.W. 1985. Complementary approaches to the understanding of parasitoid oviposition decisions. Environmental Ecology, 14: 383391.Google Scholar
Cornell, H. and Hawkins, B.A. 1993. Accumulation of native parasitoid species on introduced herbivores: a comparison of hosts as natives and hosts as invaders. American Naturalist, 141: 847865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Moraes, R.R., Loeck, A.E., and Belarmino, L.C. 1991. Natural enemies of Rachiplusia nu (Guenee, 1852) and Pseudoplusia includens (Walker, 1857) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on soybean in Rio Grande do Sul. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira, 26: 5764.Google Scholar
Federici, B.A. and Bigot, Y. 2003. Origin and evolution of polydnaviruses by symbiogenesis of insect DNA viruses in endoparasitic wasps. Journal of Insect Physiology, 49: 419432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfray, H.C.J. 1994. Parasitoids: behavioral and evolutionary ecology. Princeton University Press. Princeton, United States of America.Google Scholar
Goubault, M., Krespi, L., Boivin, G., Poinsot, D., Nenon, J.P., and Cortesero, A.M. 2004. Intraspecific variations in host discrimination behavior in the pupal parasitoid Pachycrepoideus vindemmiae Rondani (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Environmental Entomology, 33: 362369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabenweger, G., Kehrli, P., Zweimüller, I., Augustin, S., Avtzis, N., Bacher, S., Freise, J., Girardoz, S., Guichard, S., Heitland, W., Lethmayer, C., Stolz, M., Tomov, R., Volter, L., and Kenis, M. 2010. Temporal and spatial variations in the parasitoid complex of the horse chestnut leafminer during its invasion of Europe. Biological Invasions, 12: 27972813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosman, A. and Bloemhard, C. 2014. Nieuwe sluipwespen tegen turkse mot, Chrysodeixis chalrefs, in paprika. Bleiswijk: Wageningen UR Glastuinbouw. Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Guerrieri, E. and Noyes, J. 2005. Revision of the European species of Copidosoma Ratzeburg (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), parasitoids of caterpillars (Lepidoptera). Systemic Entomology, 30: 97174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, J.A. 2005. Factors affecting the evolution of development strategies in parasitoid wasps: the importance of functional constraints and incorporating complexity. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 117: 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, J.A. and Strand, M.R. 2002. The developmental strategies of endoparasitoid wasps vary with host feeding ecology. Ecology, 83: 24392451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, J.A., Canovas-Molina, A., Bezemer, T.M., and Malcicka, M. 2014. Convergent development of a parasitoid wasp on three host species with differing mass and growth potential. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 154: 1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, J.A., Ximénez de Embún, G., Bukovinszky, T., and Gols, R. 2012. The roles of ecological fitting, phylogeny and physiological equivalence in understanding realized and fundamental host ranges in endoparasitoid wasps. Ecological Entomology, 25: 21392148.Google Scholar
Heimpel, G.E., Neuhauser, C., and Hoogendoorn, M. 2003. Effects of parasitoid fecundity and host resistance on indirect interactions among hosts sharing a parasitoid. Ecology Letters, 6: 556566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, L.M., Roitberg, B.D., and Gillespie, D.R. 2006. Covariance of phenotypically plastic traits induces an adaptive shift in host selection behavior. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273: 28932899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoelscher, C.E. and Vinson, S.B. 1971. The sex ratio of a hymenopterous parasitoid, Campoletis perdistinctus, as affected by photoperiod, mating, and temperature. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 64: 13731376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, K.R., Prager, S.M., and Heimpel, G.E. 2013. Is parasitoid acceptance of different host species dynamic? Functional Ecology, 27: 12011211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ives, R. and Godfray, H.C.J. 2006. Phylogenetic analysis of trophic associations. American Naturalist, 168: E1E14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jourdie, V., Virla, E., Murillo, H., Bento, J.M.S., Turlings, T.C.J., and Alvarez, N. 2010. Phylogeography of Chelonus insularis (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and Campoletis sonorensis (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae), two primary neotropical parasitoids of the fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 103: 742749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lingren, P.D., Guerra, R.F., Nickelsen, W., and White, C. 1970. Hosts and host-age preference of Campoletis perdistinctus . Journal of Economical Entomology, 63: 518522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackauer, M. and Sequeira, R. 1993. Patterns of development in insect parasites. In Parasites and Pathogens of Insects. Edited by N.E. Beckage, S.N. Thompson, and B.A. Federici. Academic Press, New York, New York, United States of America. Pp. 120.Google Scholar
Mackauer, M., Sequeira, R., and Otto, M. 1997. Growth and development in parasitoid wasps: adaptation to variable host resources. In Vertical Food Web Interactions. Evolutionary Patterns and Driving Forces. Edited by K. Dettner, G. Bauer, and W. Volkl. Springer, Berlin, Germany. Pp. 191203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McQuate, G.T. and Sylva, C.D. 2018. Catch of the adult green garden looper, Chrysodeixis eriosoma (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in sweet potato fields in Hawaii. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society, 50: 4353.Google Scholar
Murillo, H., VanLaerhoven, S.L., Garcia, M.A., and Hunt, D.W.A. 2018. Food web and effect of trophic resources and environmental factors on parasitoids expanding their host range. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 166: 277288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Namba, O., Saigusa, M., and Tanaka, T. 2004. Cuticular encystment in larvae of Plusiinae Looper (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) parasitised by the gregarious endoparasitoid Cotesia glomerata. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 97: 976981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noyes, J.S. 1988a. Encyrtidae (Insecta: Hymenoptera). Fauna of New Zealand, Number 13, DSIR, Science Information Publishing Centre. Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Noyes, J.S. 1988b. Copidosoma truncatellum (Dalman) and C. floridanum (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera, Encyrtidae), two frequently misidentified polyembryonic parasitoids of caterpillars (Lepidoptera). Systematic Entomology, 13: 197204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papp, J. 1990. A survey of the European species of Apanteles Förster. (Hymenoptera, Braconidae: Microgastrinae) XII. Supplement to the key of the glomeratus-group. Parasitoid–host list 2. Annales Musei Historico-Naturalis Hungarici, 81: 159203.Google Scholar
Paynter, Q., Fowler, S.V., Gourlay, A.H., Groenteman, R., Peterson, P.G., Smith, L., and Winks, C.J. 2010. Predicting parasitoid accumulation on biological control agents of weeds. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47: 575582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salt, G. 1938. Experimental studies in insect parasitism. VI. Host suitability. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 29: 223246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorey, H.H. and Hale, R.L. 1965. Mass-rearing of the larvae of nine noctuid species on a single artificial medium. Journal of Economic Entomology, 58: 522524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slansky, F. Jr. 1986. Nutritional ecology of endoparasitic insects and their hosts: an overview. Journal of Insect Physiology, 32: 255261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stefanescu, C., Askew, R.R., Corbera, J., and Shaw, M.R. 2012. Parasitism and migration in southern Palaearctic populations of the painted lady butterfly, Vanessa cardui (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). European Journal of Entomology, 109: 8594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swezey, O.H. 1931. Litomastix floridana (Ashm.), a recent immigrant in Hawaii. Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society, 7: 419421.Google Scholar
Teder, T., Tammaru, T., and Pedmanson, R. 1999. Patterns of host use in solitary parasitoids (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae): field evidence from a homogeneous habitat. Ecography, 22: 7986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vinson, S.B. and Iwantsch, G.F. 1980a. Host suitability for insect. Annual Review of Entomology, 25: 397419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vinson, S.B. and Iwantsch, G.F. 1980b. Host regulation by insect parasitoids. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 55: 143165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, D.S.K., van Achterberg, C., and Horstmann, K. 2012. Taxapad Ichneumonoidea [online]. Available from [accessed January 2017].Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 12
Total number of PDF views: 17 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 21st October 2020 - 24th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-gtgjg Total loading time: 0.678 Render date: 2021-01-24T13:42:15.813Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Host suitability of Trichoplusia ni and Chrysodeixis chalcites (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) for native and nonnative parasitoids expanding their host range
Available formats

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Host suitability of Trichoplusia ni and Chrysodeixis chalcites (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) for native and nonnative parasitoids expanding their host range
Available formats

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Host suitability of Trichoplusia ni and Chrysodeixis chalcites (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) for native and nonnative parasitoids expanding their host range
Available formats

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *