Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T01:56:48.500Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feeding behaviour of adults of Pieris brassicae (L.) in a laboratory culture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

W. A. L. David  and
B. O. C. Gardiner
W. A. L. David
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Unit of Insect Physiology, Cambridge.
B. O. C. Gardiner
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Unit of Insect Physiology, Cambridge.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Only a few individuals in the first generation of adults of Pieris brassicae (L.) reared in captivity will feed on artificially prepared flowers. By breeding from the eggs laid by these individuals and from a few others which have been helped to feed it is possible to maintain the stock. In each successive generation a few more individuals feed, and after about four generations most of the insects feed voluntarily. Finally, after many generations, all the insects use the flowers, and the experiments described are concerned with this adapted stock.

Many factors influence the attraction of the insects to the artificial flowers and the volume of food taken. Colour, blue or yellow, is responsible for attracting the adults to the flowers, and it is only when they are very close to the flowers and under the stimulus of colour that they show any detectable reaction to the odour of the honey solution in the flowers. Larger blue flowers are more attractive than smaller blue flowers.

The insects find the artificial flowers more easily, at first, if they are high in the cage. More honey solution is taken at 30 than at 20°C. and more in a large cage than in a small cage. When given a choice, the insects take more 10 per cent, (v/v) than 1 per cent, (v/v) honey solution and more 20 per cent, (v/v) solution than 10 per cent, (v/v) solution. When offered two of these solutions in separate cages the insects at first take less of the 1 per cent, solution than of the 10 per cent, solution. Later, presumably in an effort to obtain sufficient nutriment, they take more of the weaker solution than of the stronger solution. The insects live for a much shorter time on the 1 per cent, solution than on the 10 per cent, solution. Fresh honey solution is preferred to a solution 4–5 days old, and older honey solution is quite unsuitable as food. When the survival of adults fed on honey and sucrose solution is compared it is found that females, especially, survive longer when feeding on honey.

About 50 per cent, of the adults fed on 10 per cent, honey solution in the normal stock cage under glasshouse conditions live for 18 days. Very few survive for longer than 36 days. Starved insects all die by the llth day under similar conditions. When starved at 12·5°C. and 60 per cent, relative humidity, about half the males live for 17 to 19 days, but all are dead by about the 23rd day, whereas half the females live for about 29 days and some survive up to 40 days.

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 52 , Issue 4 , December 1961 , pp. 741 - 762
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

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

Blunck, H. (1935). Methodisches zur Zucht von Pieris brassicae L.—Arb. physiol. angew. Ent. 2 pp. 78–87.Google Scholar
Butler, C. G. (1951). The importance of perfume in the discovery of food by the worker honeybee (Apis mellifera L.).—Proc. roy. Soc. (B) 138 pp. 403–413.Google Scholar
Butler, C. G. (1954). The world of the honeybee.—226 pp. London, Collins.Google Scholar
Culpepper, G. H. (1946). Rearing body lice on rabbits.—J. econ. Ent. 39 p. 660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
David, W. A. L. (1957). Breeding Pieris brassicae L. and Apanteles glomeratus L. as experimental insects.—Z. PflKrankh. 64 pp. 572–577.Google Scholar
David, W. A. L. & Gardiner, B. O. C. (1952). Laboratory breeding of Pieris brassicae L. and Apanteles glomeratus L.—Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (A) 27 pp. 54–56.Google Scholar
David, W. A. L. & Gardiner, B. O. C. (1961). The mating behaviour of P. brassicae (L.) in a laboratory culture.—Bull. ent. Res. 52 pp. 263–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, J. E. & Allinger, H. W. (1939). Physical and chemical properties of California honeys.—Bull. Calif, agric. Exp. Sta. no. 631, 27 pp.Google Scholar
Frohawk, F. W. (1934). The complete book of British butterflies.—384 pp. London, Ward, Lock.Google Scholar
Haydak, M. H., Palmer, L., Tanquary, M. C. & Vivino, A. E. (1942). Vitamin content of honeys.—J. Nutr. 23 pp. 581–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilse, D. (1928). Über den Farbensinn der Tagfalter.—Z. vergl. Physiol. 8 pp. 658–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilse, D. (1941). The colour vision of insects.—Proc. R. phil. Soc. Glasg. 65 pp. 68–82.Google Scholar
Lubbock, J. (1882). Ants, bees and wasps.—2nd edn., 448 pp. London, Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Pryce-Jones, J. (1944). Some problems associated with nectar, pollen and honey. —Proc. Linn. Soc. Lond. Sess. 155 (1942–3) pp. 129–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. N. & Eddy, G. W. (1954). Techniques for rearing and handling body lice, oriental rat fleas, and cat fleas.—Bull. World Hlth Org. 10 pp. 127–137.Google ScholarPubMed
Stahler, N. (1959). Some changes in the biological characteristics of colonized Anopheles quadrimaculatus Say.—Ann. ent. Soc. Amer. 52 pp. 214–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Way, M. J., Smith, P. M. & Hopkins, B. (1951). The selection and rearing of leaf-eating insects for use as test subjects in the study of insecticides.— Bull. ent. Res. 42 pp. 331–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wellington, W. G. (1957). Individual differences as a factor in population dynamics: the development of a problem.—Canad. J. Zool. 35 pp. 293–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wigglesworth, V. B. (1953). The principles of insect physiology.—5th edn., 546 pp. London, Methuen; New York, Dutton.Google Scholar