Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T07:38:43.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Population dynamics and foraging behaviour of Diaeretus leucopterus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), and its potential for the biological control of pine damaging Eulachnus spp. (Homoptera: Aphididae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

S.T. Murphy  and
W. Völkl
S.T. Murphy*
Affiliation:
International Institute of Biological Control, Ascot, UK
W. Völkl
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Ecology, University of Bayreuth, Germany
*
Correspondence: S.T. Murphy, International Institute of Biological Control, Silwood Park, Buckhurst Road, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7TA, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Palaearctic pine aphids, Eulachnus agilis (Kaltenbach) and Eulachnus rileyi (Williams) have both been introduced into other continents where they have been reported causing damage to economically important pines. In Euorpe, they are attacked by the specialist parasitoid Diaeretus leucopterus (Haliday) which has been suggested as a possible biological control agent. Here we report on several aspects of the ecology of the parasitoid, conducted on E. agilis in Germany in 1993–94, to provide a more scientific basis for judging its potential for use in biological control. Parasitism of all instars in the field rarely exceeded 10% and was independent of host density. A high percentage of parasitized aphids were hyperparasitized. Measurements of the impact over 16 weeks in a greenhouse-release experiment showed that parasitism rates increased from 2 to 19% but were insufficient to suppress the aphid population below a damaging level. There was evidence of a density-dependent response. Studies on foraging behaviour showed that female parasitoids searched pines by quite extensive walks. There was no relationship between the number of aphids per tree and number of ovipositions, and the mean number of ovipositions per female per tree was 2.5 ± 0.4 eggs. The majority (55.1%) of encountered aphids did not respond to the parasitoids. However, female parasitoids attacked a much higher proportion of aphids that did respond but oviposition success on this group was poor. The number of aphid-infested needles on seedlings increased significantly owing to the parasitoid's foraging activity. On the basis of these results, it is suggested that D. leucopterus is only likely to be of benefit in biological control if used in conjunction with other complementary natural enemies.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 86 , Issue 4 , August 1996 , pp. 397 - 405
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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

Ayal, Y. & Green, R. (1993) Optimal egg distribution among host patches for parasitoids subject to attack by hyperparasitoids. American Naturalist 141, 120–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bellows, T.S. Jr., Van Driesche, R.G. & Elkinton, J.S. (1992) Life-table construction and analysis in the evaluation of natural enemies. Annual Review of Entomology 37, 587–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, A.L., Anderson, J.M.E. & Hales, D.F. (1986) Predators: agents of biological control. pp. 75–94in Mclean, G.D., Garrett, R.G. & Ruesink, W.G. (Eds) Plant virus epidemics. London, UK, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Blackman, R.L. & Eastop, V.F. (1994) Aphids on the world's trees. 987 pp. Wallingford, UK, CAB International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bliss, M. & Kearby, W.H. (1971) Observations on the oviposition sites and laboratory development of the fundatrix and virginopara of the aphid Eulachnus agilis. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 64, 1407–1410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bliss, M., Yendol, W.G. & Kearby, W.H. (1973) Probing behaviour of Eulachnus agilis and injury to Scotch pine. Journal of Economic Entomology 66, 651–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, C.I. & Maslen, N.R. (1982) Conifer lachnids. Forest Commission Bulletin 58, 72 pp. London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Dean, G.J. (1974) Effects of parasites and predators on cereal aphids Metopolophium dirhodum (Wlk.) and Macrosiphum avenae (F.) (Hem.: Aphididae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 63, 411–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, G.J., Jones, M.G. & Powell, W. (1981) The relative abundance of the hymenopterous parasites attacking Metopolophium dirhodum (Walker) and Macrosiphum avenae (F.) (Hem., Aphididae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 71, 307–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehler, L.E. (1990) Introduction strategies in biological control. pp. 111–134in Mackauer, M., Ehler, L.E. & Roland, J. (Eds) Critical issues in biological control. Andover, UK, Intercept.Google Scholar
Fabre, J.P. & Rabasse, J.M. (1987) Introduction dans Ie sud-est de la France d'un parasite; Pauesia cedrobii (Hymenoptera: Aphiidae) du puceron: Cedrobium laportei (Homoptera: Lachnidae) du cèdre de l'atlas: Cedrus atlantica. Entomophoga 32, 127–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fink, U. & Völkl, W. (1995) The effect of abiotic factors on foraging and oviposition success of the aphid parasitoid, Aphidius rosae. Oecologia 103, 371–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gerling, D.H., Roitberg, B.D. & Mackauer, M. (1990) Instarspecific defense of the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum: influence on oviposition success of the hymenopterous parasite Aphelinus asychis. Journal of Insect Behaviour 3, 501–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagvar, E.B. & Hofsvang, T. (1990) The aphid parasitoid Ephedrus cerasicola, a possible candidate for biological control in glasshouses? SROP/WPRS Bulletin 13 (5), 87–90.Google Scholar
Hofsvang, T. & Hagvar, E.B. (1980) Use of mummies of Ephedrus cerasicola Starý to control Myzus persicae (Sulzer) in small glasshouses. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Entomologie 90, 220–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, R.D. (1989) Biological control in the open field, pp. 167–198in Minks, A.K. & Harrewijn, P. (Eds) Aphids. Their biology, natural enemies and control. Vol 2 C. Amsterdam, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Hughes, R.T., Woolcock, L.T., Roberts, J.A. & Hughes, M.A. (1987) Biological control of the spotted alfalfa aphid, Therioaphis trifolii f. maculata, on lucerne crops in Australia, by the introduced parasitic hymenopteran Trioxys complanatus. Journal of Applied Ecology 24, 515–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katerere, Y. (1982) Aphid density and animal damage to Pinus patula Schiede and Depple in a clone bank at Meisetter Forest Research Station. South African Forestry Journal 122, 63–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katerere, Y. (1984) Biology and population dynamics of the pine needie aphid, Eulachnus rileyi (Williams) in Zimbabwe. South African Forestry Journal 129, 40–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kearby, W.H. & Bliss, W. (1969) Field evaluation of three granular systematic insecticides for control of the aphids Eulachnus agilis and Cinara pinea on Scotch pine. Journal of Economic Entomology 62, 60–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kfir, R. & Kirsten, F. (1991) Seasonal abundance of Cinara cronartii (Homoptera: Aphididae) and the effect of an introduced parasite, Pauesia sp. (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 84, 76–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klingauf, F. (1967) Abwehr- und Meidereaktionen von Blattläusen (Aphididae) bei Bedrohung durch Räuber und Parasiten. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Entomologie 59, 277–317.Google Scholar
Liebscher, S. (1972) Zur Taxonomie und Biologie von Dendrocerus-Arten (Hymenoptera, Ceraphronoidea, Megaspilidae) im Hyperparasitenkreis der Lachnidae (Homoptera, Aphidoidea) auf Pinus und Larix. Dissertation, Technical University of Dresden.Google Scholar
Lopez, E.R., Van Driesche, R.G. & Elkinton, J.S. (1990) Rates of parasitism by Diaeretiella rapae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) for cabbage aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae) in and outside colonies: Why do they differ? Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 63, 158–165.Google Scholar
Mackauer, M. & Starý, P. (1967) World Aphidiidae. Le Francois, Paris. 195 pp.Google Scholar
Mackauer, M. & Chow, F.J. (1986) Parasites and parasite impact on aphid populations. pp. 95–117in McLean, G.D., Garret, R.G. & Ruesink, W.G. (Eds) Plant virus epidemics: monitoring, modelling and predicting outbreaks. Academic Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
Mackauer, M. & Völkl, W. (1993) Regulation of aphid populations by aphidiid wasps: Does aphidiid foraging behaviour or hyperparasitism limit impact? Oecologia 94, 339–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazodze, R. (1992) A review of forest entomology. pp. 89–102in Piearce, G.D. & Shaw, P. (Eds) Forestry research in Zimbabwe. Proceedings of the anniversary seminar ‘Forestry Research Advances in Zimbabwe’ Zimbabwe College of Forestry, Mutare, 27–31 August 1990. Harare, Zimbabwe, The Forestry Commission.Google Scholar
Mescheloff, E. & Rosen, D. (1990) Biosystematic studies on the Aphidiidae of Israel (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonoidea) 4. The genera Pauesia, Diaeretus, Aphidius and Diaretiella. Israel Journal of Entomology 24, 51–91.Google Scholar
Michaud, J.P. & Mackauer, M. (1994) The use of visual cues in host evalution by aphidiid wasps. I. Comparison between three Aphidius parasitoids of the pea aphid. Entomologia Experimentatis et Applicata 70, 273–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, N.J. (1990) Biological control of forest aphid pests in Africa. Bulletin of Entomological Research 80, 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkenberg, O.P.J.M. & van Lenteren, J.C. (1990) Evaluation of parasitoids for biological control of leafminers on glasshouse tomatoes: development of a preintroduction selection procedure. Bulletin SROP/WPRS 13, 124–128.Google Scholar
Murphy, S.T., Chilima, C.Z., Cross, A.E., Abraham, Y.J., Kairo, M.T.K., Allard, G.B. & Day, R.K. (1994) Exotic conifer aphids in Africa: ecology and biological control. pp. 233–242in Leather, S.R., Watt, A.D., Mills, N.J.Walters, K.F.A. (Eds) Individuals, populations and pattems in ecology. Andover, UK, Intercept.Google Scholar
Odendaal, M. (1980) Eulachnus rileyi: a new pest on pines in Zimbabwe. South African Forestry Journal 115, 69–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paetzold, G. & Vater, D. (1967) Populations dynamische Untersuchungen an den Parasiten und Hyperparasiten von Brevicoryne brassicae (L.) (Homoptera: Aphididae). Acta Entomologica Bohemoslovaca 64, 83–90.Google Scholar
Rabasse, J.M. & Wyatt, I.M. (1985) The biology of aphids and their parasites in greenhouses. pp. 66–73in Hussey, N.W. & Scopes, N. (Eds) Biological pest control: the glasshouse experience. Poole, Dorset, Blandford.Google Scholar
Ramakers, P.M.J. (1989) Biological control in greenhouses. pp. 199–208in Minks, A.K. & Harrewijn, P. (Eds) Aphids. Their biology, natural enemies and control. Vol 2 C. Amsterdam, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Scheurer, S. (1971) Der Einfluß der Ameisen und der natürlichen Feinde auf einige an Pinus sylvestris lebende Cinarinen in der Dübener Heide. Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne 41, 197–229.Google Scholar
Starý, P. (1966) Aphid parasites of Czechoslovakia. 242 pp. Praha, Academia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starý, P. (1970) Biology of aphid parasites, with respect to integrated control. Series Entomology 6. 643 pp. Den Haag, W. Junk.Google Scholar
Starý, P. (1988) Aphidiidae. pp. 171–184in Minks, A.K. & Harrewijn, P. (Eds) Aphids. Their biology, natural enemies and control. Vol 2 B. Amsterdam, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Tremblay, E. (1975) I parassiti degli afidi del Pinus nigra Arn. (Hymenoptera Icheumonoidea). Bollettino del Laboratorio di Entomologia Agraria ‘Filippo Silvestri’ 32, 91–110.Google Scholar
Völkl, W. (1990) Fortpflanzungsstrategien von Blattlausparasitoiden (Hymenoptera, Aphidiidae): Konsequenzen ihrer Interaktionen mit Wirten und Ameisen. Dissertation. Universität Bayreuth. 130 pp.Google Scholar
Völkl, W. (1991) Species-specific larval instar preferences and aphid defense reactions in three parasitoids of Aphis fabae. pp. 73–78in Polgar, L, Chambers, R., Dixon, A.F.G. and Hodek, I. (Eds) Behaviour and impact of aphidophaga. The Hague, SPB Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
Völkl, W. (1992) Aphids or their parasitoid: who actually benefits from ant-attendance? Journal of Animal Ecology 61, 273–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Völkl, W. (1994) Searching at different spatial scales: The foraging behaviour of the aphid parasitoid Aphidius rosae in rose bushes. Oecologia 100, 177–183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Völkl, W. & Kraus, W. (in press) Foraging behaviour and resource utilization of the aphid parasitoid, Pauesia unilachni: adaptation to host distribution and mortality risks. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata.Google Scholar
Völkl, W. & Stadler, B. (in press) Colony reorientation and successful aphid defence behaviour in the conifer aphid, Schizolachnus pineti. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata.Google Scholar
Way, M.J. (1966) Significance of self-regulatory dispersal in control of aphids by natural enemies. pp. 149–150in Hodek, I. (Ed.) Ecology of aphidophagous insects. Praha, Academia.Google Scholar
Weisser, W.W., Houston, A.I. & Völkl, W. (1994) Foraging strategies in solitary parasitoids: the trade-off between female and offspring mortality risks. Evolutionary Ecology 8, 587–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar