Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T05:01:37.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies of Parasite Oviposition Behaviour.: II. Leptomastix dactylopii Howard (Hymenoptera, Encyrtidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

D. C. Lloyd
D. C. Lloyd
Affiliation:
Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Entomophagous insects as a group show all degrees of host preferences from the polyphagous species which develop on variable numbers of hosts to the stricdy monophagous forms wllich are limited to development on a single host species. Polyphagy is generally regarded as the more primitive condition while the fact that even amnng species so characterized there frequentIy exist strong preferences in the form of host determined races is taken as an indication of one method by which the more specialized habit was attained. The general problem of the dynamics of host selection in the entomophagous Hymenoptera and Diptera has attracted the attention of numerous investigators (eg. Thompson & Parker 1927, Salt 1935, Ullyett 1936) and many have stressed that for any given parasite the range of hosts attacked and developed on is the end result of various processes. These processes have been conveniently described by Salt (1938) as host finding, selection, and suitability, the first phase being more usually referred to as habitat selection (Flanders 1937, Thorpe 1945). This interpretation has received wide acceptance among biological control and allied workers.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 90 , Issue 8 , August 1958 , pp. 450 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1958

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

1.Armstrong, E. A. 1950. The nature and function of displacement activities. Symposium Vol. 4, pp. 361–384, Soc. Expt. Biol.Google Scholar
2.Bartlett, B. R. and Lloyd, D. C. 1958. Mealybugs attacking citrus in California—A survey of their natural enemies and the release of new parasites and predators. J. Econ. Ent. 51 pp. 90–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Bess, H. A. 1939. Investigations on the resistance of mealybugs (Homoptera) to parasitization by internal Hymenopterous parasites, with special reference to phagocytosis. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 32 pp. 189–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Clancy, D. W. 1944. Experimental parasitization studies with the Comstock mealybug. J. Econ. Ent. 37 p. 450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Clausen, C. P. 1956. Biological control of insect pests in the continental United States. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bul. 1139.Google Scholar
6.Compere, H. 1939. Mealybugs and their insect enemies in S. America. Univ. Cal. Publ. Ent. 7 pp. 57–74.Google Scholar
7.Dethier, V. G. 1951. Host plant perception in phytophagous insects. 9th Int. Cong. Ent. Symposium pp. 81–89.Google Scholar
8.Edwards, R. L. 1954(a). The effect of diet on egg maturation and resorption in Mormoniella vitripennis. (Hymenoptera, Pteromalidae). Quart. J. Micro. Sci. 95 pp. 459–468.Google Scholar
9.Edwards, R. L. 1954(b). The host finding and oviposition behaviour of Mormoniella vitripennis. (Walker) (Hymenoptera, Pteromalidae), a parasite of Muscoid flies. Behaviour 7 pp. 88–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Finlayson, L. H. 1950. Host preference of Cephalonomia waterstoni Gahan, a bethylid parasitoid of Laemophloemus species. Behaviour 2 pp. 275–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Flanders, S. E. 1937. Habitat selection by Trichogramma. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 30 pp. 208–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Flanders, S. E. 1942. Oosorption and ovulation in relation to oviposition in the parasitic Hymenoptera. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 35 pp. 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Flanders, S. E. 1950. Regulation of ovulation and egg disposal in the parasitic Hymenoptera. Can. Ent. 82 pp. 134–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Fullaway, D. T. 1946. Notes and Exhibitions. Proc. Haw. Ent. Soc. 12 p. 464.Google Scholar
15.Grosch, D. S. 1950. Starvation studies with the parasitic wasp Habrobracon. Biol. Bul. 99 pp. 65–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Hambleton, E. J. 1935. Notas sobre Pseudococcinae de importancia economica no Brasil com a descripcao de cuatro especies novas. Arch. Inst. Biol. Sao Paulo 6 pp. 105–120.Google Scholar
17.Howard, L. O. 1885. Descriptions of N. American Chalcididae from the collections of the U.S.D.A. and Dr. Riley, with biological notes. U.S.D.A. Bur. Ent. Bul. 5 p. 23.Google Scholar
18.Kerrich, G. J. 1953. Report on Encyrtidae associated with mealybugs on cacao in Trinidad and on some other species related thereto. Bul. Ent. Res. 44 pp. 789–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Kirkpatrick, T. W. 1953. Notes on minor insect pests of cacao in Trinidad. Report on Cacao Research 1952 pp. 62–71. St. Augustine, Trinidad.Google Scholar
20.Laing, J. 1937. Host finding by insect parasites. 1. Observations on the finding of hosts by Alysia manducator, Mormoniella vitripennis, and Trichogramma evanescens. J. Anim. Ecol. 6 pp. 298–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Maple, J. D. 1947. The eggs and first instar larvae of Encyrtidae and their morphological adaptations for respiration. Univ. Cal. Publ. Ent. 8 pp. 25–122.Google Scholar
22.Muesebeck, C. F. W., et al. 1951. Hymenoptera of America North of Mexico. Synoptic catalog. U.S.D.A. Agric. Monograph 2.Google Scholar
23.Nishida, T. 1955. Natural enemies of the melon fly, Dacus cucurbttae Coq. in Hawaii. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 48 pp. 171–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Nishida, T. 1956. An experimental study of the ovipositional behavior of Opius fletcheri Silvestri (Hym. Braconidae), a parasite of the melon fly. Proc. Haw. Ent. Soc. 26 pp. 126–134.Google Scholar
25.Salt, G. 1935. Experimental studies in insect parasitism. III. Host Selection. Proc. Roy. Soc. Series B. 117 pp. 413–435.Google Scholar
26.Salt, G. 1938. Experimental studies in insect parasitism. VI. Host suitability. Bull. Ent. Res. 29 pp. 223–246.Google Scholar
27.Schneirla, T. C. 1953. Basic problems in the nature of insect behaviour. In: Insect Physiology, Edit. Roeder, K. D.. N.Y.Google Scholar
28.Swezey, O. H. 1949. Notes and Exhibitions. Proc. Haw. Ent. Soc. 13 p. 339.Google Scholar
29.Thompson, W. R. & Parker, H. L. 1927. The problem of host relations with special reference to entomophagous parasites. Parasitology 19 pp. 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Thorpe, W. H. 1945. The evolutionary significance of habitat selection. J. Animal Ecology 14 pp. 67–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Ullyett, G. C. 1936. Host selection by Microplectron fuscipennis Zett. Proc. Roy. Soc. B. 120 pp. 253–291.Google Scholar
32.Zimmerman, E. C. 1948. Insects of Hawaii V. 5. Homoptera Sternorhyncha. Univ. Hawaii.Google Scholar