Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T08:12:17.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Comparative Internal Larval Anatomy of Sawflies (Hymenoptera: Symphyta)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Doreen E. Maxwell
Get access

Abstract

Examination of 132 recognized species of sawflies (Hymenoptera: Symphyta) from America, Europe, Africa, and Australia, has demonstrated the value of internal anatomical larval detail as a taxonomic tool and an indicator of phylogenetic relationship. Two characters, the salivary glands and Malpighian tubules, proved of major importance. The salivary glands fall into three main categories, narrow squared ducts and incorporated gland cells (the Orthandria with the exception of the Xyelidae), narrow ducts and sheathlike gland cells (the Xyelidae), and either increased cell numbers and narrow branching ducts or expanded ducts (the Tenthredinoidea). Three divisions of the Tenthredinidae are suggested, viz. the Selandriinae-Dolerinae-Athaliinae-Lycaotinae, the Nematinae, and the Blennocampinae-Allantinae-Heterarthrinae-Tenthredininae, corresponding to Malpighian tubule groupings of primitive, intermediate-advanced, and advanced. Character trends are discussed in the light of existing adult arrangements (Ross and Benson), and external larval (Yuasa). The survey emphasizes the need of a revision of family and subfamily limits. Where identification is difficult, internal anatomy is of use in determination to genus and species as well as to family and subfamily. The frequency of parallel evolution does not affect the use of certain characters indicative of progressive change within a group.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada , Volume 87 , Supplement S1 , 1955 , pp. 5 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1955

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.)

Footnotes

1

Contribution No. 180, Forest Biology Division, Science Service, Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, Canada.

2

Agricultural Research Officer, Forest Biology Division. Present address, Queen's University, Kingston,Ont

References

1.Anglas, M. J. 1898. Sur l'histogénèse du lutre digestif des Hymenoptères pendant la métamorphose. C. R. Soc. Biol. Paris, Sér. 10, Tome 5: 1167–1170.Google Scholar
2.Baird, A. B. 1921. A comparative study of the female reproductive system in the Hymenoptera. Proc. Acad. Ent. Soc. 7: 73–85.Google Scholar
3.Benson, R. B. 1934. A classification of the sawflies of the family Pterygophoridae, with a revision of the Australian members of the subfamily Euryinae (Hymenoptera Symphyta) Trans. R. Ent. Soc. Lond. 82: 461–478. Figs. 1–9.Google Scholar
4.Benson, R. B. 1938. On the classification of sawflies (Hymenoptera Symphyta). Trans. R. Ent. Soc. Lond. 87(15): 353–384.Google Scholar
5.Benson, R. B. 1939. A revision of the Australian sawflies of the genus Perga Leach. Australian Zoologist IX: III, Dec. 1938.Google Scholar
6.Benson, R. B. 1950. An introduction to the natural history of British sawflies. (Hymenoptera Symphyta). Trans. Soc. Brit. Ent. 10(2): 46–142.Google Scholar
7.Benson, R. B. 1951. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects. Hymenoptera. 2. Symphyta. Section (a). Handbook, R. Ent. Soc. Lond. 6 Part 2(a).Google Scholar
8.Benson, R. B. 1952. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects. Hymenoptera. 2. Symphyta. Section (a). Handbook, R. Ent. Soc. Lond. 6 Part 2(b).Google Scholar
9.Berland, L. 1925. Faune de France: Hymenopt. Vespiformes. 3 pts. Paris. 720 p-1136 Illust.Google Scholar
10.Bird, F. T. 1949. Tumours associated with a virus infection of an insect. Nature, 163: 777.Google Scholar
Bird, F. T. 1953. The effect of metamorphosis on the multiplication of an insect virus. Can. J. Zool. 31: 300–303.Google Scholar
11.Bordas, L. 1895. Appareil glandulaire des Hymenoptères (glandes salivaires, tube digestif, tubes de malpighi, et glandes vénineuses). Ann. Sci. Nat. 7: 19: 1–36.Google Scholar
12.Bradley, J. C. 1913. The Siricidae of North America, J. Ent. Zool. Claremont 5: 1–30, Plates I-V.Google Scholar
13.Buchner, P. 1918. Vergleichende Eistudien. I. Die akzessorischen Kerne des Hymenoptereneiens Archiv f. mikrosk. Anat., Bd. 91, 3–4 Heft: 1–202.Google Scholar
14.Bugnion, E. 1890. Récherches sur le développement postembryonnaire l'anatomie et les moeurs de l'Encyrtus fusicollis. Rec. Z. Suisse. 5: 435.Google Scholar
15.Calman, W. T. 1940. A museum zoologist's view of taxonomy. The New Systematics. Edited J., Huxley. Oxford University Press, viii-583.Google Scholar
16.Cameron, P. 1882–1883. A monograph of the British Phytophagous Hymenoptera. The Ray Society, London. Volumes 1–4.Google Scholar
17.Cholodkovsky, N. 1897. Entom. Miscellen. V. Uber Spritzapparate der cimbiciden larven. Horae Soc. Ent. Russicae, 30.Google Scholar
18.Doncaster, L. 1907. Gametogenesis and Fertilization in Nematus ribesii. Quart. Jour. Micr. Sci., 51: 101: 113.Google Scholar
19.Dusham, E. H. 1928. The larval wax glands of the dogwood sawfly (Macremphytus varianus (Norton)) Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 21: 92–96.Google Scholar
20.Dustan, A. G. 1922. An histological account of three parasites of the fall webworm (Hyphantria cunea (Drury)). Proc. Acad. Ent. Soc., 8: 84–89.Google Scholar
21.Eastham, L. E. S. 1929. The post-embryonic development of Phaenoserphus viator (Hal). (Proctotrypoidea a parasite of the larva of Pterostichus niger (Carabidae) with notes on the anatomy of the larva. Parasitology, 21: 1–21.Google Scholar
22.Eliescu, G. 1932. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Morphologie, Anatomie, und Biologie von Lophyrus pini. Part II, Z. F. Angew, Entomol. 19: 188–206.Google Scholar
23.Enslin, E. 1912–1918. Die Tenthredinoidea Mitteleuropas, 1–7, Deuts, ent. Z., Beihefte, 1912–1918, Abd. 1–153.Google Scholar
24.Farnsworth, M. N. 1947. The morphology and Musculature of the larval head of Anopheles quadrimaculatus (Say). Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 40; 1: 137–151.Google Scholar
25.Frenzel, J. 1885. Einiges über den Mitteldarm der Insekten, sowie über Ephithelregeneration Arch. mikr. Anat., 26: 229–306.Google Scholar
26.Gatenby, J. B. 1919. Notes on the bionomics and embryology and anatomy of certain Hymenoptera Parasitica, especially of Microgaster connexus (Rees). J. Linn. Soc. Lond. Zool. 33: 387–416.Google Scholar
27.Graber, J. 1890. Vergleichende Studien am Keimstreif der Insekten Denkschr. d. Math. Naturwiss. Classed. Akad. d. Wiss. Wien, 57: 621–734.Google Scholar
28.Green, T. L. 1931. The anatomy and histology of the alimentary canal of the common wasp, Vespa vulgaris, Hymenoptera. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1931: 1041–1066.Google Scholar
29.Green, T. L. 1933. Some aspects of the metamorphosis of the alimentary system in the wasp, Vespa vulgaris, Hymenoptera. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1933: 629–644.Google Scholar
30.Handlirsch, A. 1906–1908. Die Fossilen Insekten und die phylogenie der rezenten Formen. 2 Volumes, pp. IX-VI-430; XL-51 pls. Engelmann, Leipzig.Google Scholar
31.Hartig, T. 1837. Die Familien der Blattwespen und Holzwespen, nebst einer allgemeinen Einleitung zur Naturgeschichte der Hymenopteran. Berlin.Google Scholar
32.Henschen, W. 1931. Uber die Entwicklung der Geschlechtsdrusen von Habrobracon juglandis. Ash. Z. Morph. Okol. Tiere, 13: 144–178.Google Scholar
33.Hering, M. 1939–1940. Die peritrophischen Hüller der Honigbiens mit besonderer Berüch sichtiguns der zeit Wahrend der Entwicklung des Imaginalen Darmes, Ein Beitrag, zum Studium der peritrophischen Membran der Insekten. Koblenz, Zoologische Jahrbucher 66 Anatomie.Google Scholar
34.Holtz, H. 1909. Von der Secretion und Absorbtion der Darmzellen bei Nematus. Anat. Heft. Wiesbaden, Abt. 1, B.D. 39: 683–696.Google Scholar
35.Johanssen, G. A. and Butt, F. H.. 1941. Embryology of Insects and Myriapods. McGraw Hill, N.Y., VII & 453.Google Scholar
36.Konow, F. W. 1905a Hymenoptera, Fam. Lydidae. Wytsman's. Genera Insectorum, 27: 27 pp., 1 pl.Google Scholar
Konow, F. W. 1905b Hymenoptera, Fam. Siricidae. Wytsman's. Genera Insectorum, 28: 14 pp., 1 pl.Google Scholar
Konow, F. W. 1905c Hymenoptera, Fam. Tenthredinidae. Wytsman's. Genera Insectorum, 29: 176 pp., 3 pls.Google Scholar
37.Loele, K. 1914. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Histologie und Funktion der Hymenopteren-Darmes Z. Allg. Physiol. 16: 1–36.Google Scholar
38.MacGillivray, A. D. 1906. A study of the wings of the Tenthredinoidea, a superfamily of the Hymenoptera. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 24: 569–654.Google Scholar
39.Malaise, R. 1945. Tenthredinoidea of South-eastern Asia, with a general zoogeographical review. Opuscula Entomologica Supplementum IV. (Lundi entomologiska sallskapet).Google Scholar
40.Mickey, G. J. and Melampey, R. M.. 1941. Cytological studies of fat cells in the larval honeybee (Apis mellifica, L.) Anat. Ree. 81: (Suppl) 53.Google Scholar
41.Middleton, W. 1917. Notes on the larvae of some Cephidae. Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., 19: 174–179.Google Scholar
42.Morice, F. D. 1919. Australian Sawflies. Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1918: 247–333.Google Scholar
43.Pérez, C. 1912. Observations sur l'histolyse et l'histogenèse dans la métamorphose des Vespèdes (Pollitstes gallica L.) Mém. Ac. R. Bélg. (2) 3: Fasc. 8: 1–101.Google Scholar
44.Peterson, A. 1948. Larvae of insects, an introduction to Nearctic species. Lepidoptera and Plant infesting Hymenoptera. Part I, Edward Bros. Inc. Mich. 315 pps.Google Scholar
45.Poletajew, N. 1885. Ueber die Spinndrüsen der Blattwespen. Zool. Anz., 8: 22–23.Google Scholar
46.Rapp, W. T. 1947. The numbers of gastric caeca in some larval Scarabaeoidea. Can. Ent. 79: 145–147.Google Scholar
47.Rohwer, S. A. 1911. A classification of the suborder Chalastogastra of the Hymenoptera. Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., 13: 15–226.Google Scholar
48.Rohwer, S. 1918. New sawflies of the subfamily Diprioninae (Hym.). Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash., 20: 79–90.Google Scholar
49.Ross, H. H. 1932a The subfamily Lycaotinae in North America (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae). Can. Ent. 64: 41–45, 1 pl.Google Scholar
50.Ross, H. H. 1932b The hymenopterous family Xyelidae in North America. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 25: 153–169, 2 pls.Google Scholar
51.Ross, H. H. 1936a The ancestry and wing venation of the Hymenoptera. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 29: 99–111, 2 pls.Google Scholar
52.Ross, H. H. 1937. A generic classification of the nearctic sawflies (Hymenoptera, Symphyta) Ill. Biol. Mon., 34: 174 pp., 17 pls.Google Scholar
53.Ross, H. H. 1951. Hymenoptera of America North of Mexico, Synoptic Catalog. Suborder Symphyta (Chalastogastra). U.S. Dept. Agric. Agriculture Monograph No. 2.Google Scholar
54.Saint-Hilaire, K. 1927. Histo-Physiologische Studien über die Spinndrusen der Tenthrediniden-Larven. Z. Zellforsch, 5: 449–494.Google Scholar
55.Saint-Hilaire, K. 1931. Uber Vorderdarm-Anhänge bei Lophyrus-Larven und ihre Bedeutung. Z. morph. Okol. Tiere. 21: 608–616.Google Scholar
56.Sanderson, A. R. 1932. The cytology of parthenogenesis in Tenthredinidae. Genetica 14: 321–451.Google Scholar
57.Schmeider, R. G. 1928. Observations on the fat body of Hymenoptera. J. Morph. 45(1): 121–185.Google Scholar
58.Severin, H. C. and Severin, H. H. P.. 1908. Anatomical and histological studies of the female reproductive organs of the American sawfly, Cimbex americana (Leach). Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer., 1: 87–100.Google Scholar
59.Severin, H. C. and Severin, H. H. P.. 1914. Anatomical and histological studies of the digestive canal of Cimbex americana (Leach). Trans. Wisc. Acad. Sci. Arts Lett. 16(1): 38–60.Google Scholar
60.Shinoda, O. 1927. Contributions to the knowledge of intestinal secretion in insects, II-accompanying histo-cytology of the mid-intestine in various orders of insects. Z. Zell-forschung 5: 287–292.Google Scholar
61.Snodgrass, R. E. 1935. Principles of Insect Morphology. McGraw Hill Co., IX-667.Google Scholar
62.Smith, S. G. 1940. A new form of spruce sawfly identified by means of its cytology and parthenogenesis. Sci. Agriculture, 21(4): 245–305, Fig. la-116, 14 tables.Google Scholar
63.Taylor, E. B. 1931. The morphology of the Tenthredinid head. Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. Edinburgh, 22: 41–70, 10 plates.Google Scholar
64.Thomson, C. G. 1871. Hymenoptera Scandinaviae, Vol. I, Phytophaga. Ohlsson, Lund, 342 pp.Google Scholar
65.Tiegs, O. W. 1922. Researches on the insect metamorphosis I. On the structure and post-embryonic development of a Chalcid wasp, Nasoria. II. on the physiology and interpretation of the insect metamorphosis. Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Aust. 46: 319–527.Google Scholar
66.Waterhouse, D. F. 1953. Studies on the digestion of wool by insects. IX. Some features of digestion in chewing-lice (Malophaga) from bird and mammalian hosts. Austr. Jour. Biol. Sci. Vol. 6; 2: 257–275.Google Scholar
67.Wigglesworth, V. B. 1929. Digestion in the Tsetse-fly—A study of structure and function. Parasitology, Vol. 21: 288–300.Google Scholar
68.Wigglesworth, V. B. 1950. The principles of Insect Physiology. London: Methuen Co. Ltd. viii-544.Google Scholar
69.Yuasa, H. 1923. A classification of the larvae of the Tenthredinoidea. Ill. Biol. Mon., 7: 172 pp. 14 pls.Google Scholar