Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T02:39:40.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inter- and intraspecific interactions in two mealybug predators Spalgis epius and Cryptolaemus montrouzieri in the presence and absence of prey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2013

A.S. Dinesh  and
M.G. Venkatesha
A.S. Dinesh
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Bangalore University, Jnanabharathi, Bengaluru 560056, Karnataka, India
M.G. Venkatesha*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Bangalore University, Jnanabharathi, Bengaluru 560056, Karnataka, India
*
*Author for correspondence Phone: +91 9448689080 Fax: 91 80 23211020 E-mail: venkatmelally@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Spalgis epius and Cryptolaemus montrouzieri are the two potential predators of different species of mealybugs. However, the mode of their interactions is not known to use these predators together in the field. Hence, we investigated on the possible interactions i.e., cannibalism, intraguild predation (IGP) and competition between the predators in the presence and absence of prey Planococcus citri. In the presence of prey, no cannibalism and predation were observed in both S. epius and C. montrouzieri larvae. A pair of S. epius larvae consumed significantly more number of mealybugs than one S. epius/C. montrouzieri larva or a pair of C. montrouzieri larvae. The predation of S. epius larva by C. montrouzieri larva was significantly more than the predation of C. montrouzieri by S. epius. Conspecific and interspecific egg predation was absent both in S. epius and C. montrouzieri. Cannibalism in C. montrouzieri was more than that in S. epius. The study indicated that C. montrouzieri larvae can be used as an additive along with voracious S. epius larvae under abundant prey population. IGP was asymmetric between the two predators in the absence of prey. Both S. epius and C. montrouzieri larvae can maintain a stable coexistence when prey is abundantly available, however, in the complete absence of prey C. montrouzieri may dominate the guild. This study provides an insight into the possible complex inter- and intraspecific predatory phenomena in the field to use these two predators in the biological control of mealybugs.

Keywords

inter- and intraspecific interactionscannibalismintraguild predationSpalgis epiusCryptolaemus montrouzieriPlanococcus citri
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 104 , Issue 1 , February 2014 , pp. 48 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

Agarwala, B.K. & Yasuda, H. (2001) Overlapping oviposition and chemical defence of eggs in two co-occurring species of ladybird predators of aphids. Journal of Ethology 19, 47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, J., Bieri, M. & Delucchi, V. (1987) Growth and development of immature life stages of Propylea 14-punctata L. and Coccinella 7-punctata L. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) simulated by the metabolic pool model. Entomophaga 32, 415–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentley, W. (2002) Vine Mealybug, Planococcus ficus, Management for North and Central Coast Vineyards. ucce.ucdavis.edu/files/fileibrary/2002/4381.pdf.Google Scholar
Browning, H.W. (1992) Overview of biological control of homopterous pests in the Caribbean. Florida Entomologists 75, 440–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinale, B.J., Harvey, C.T., Gross, K. & Ives, A.R. (2003) Biodiversity and biocontrol: emergent impacts of a multi-enemy assemblage on pest suppression and crop yield in an agroecosystem. Ecological Letters 6, 857–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chacko, M.J., Krishnamoorthy Bhat, P., Anand Rao, L.V., Deepak Singh, M.B., Ramanarayan, E.P. & Sreedharan, K. (1978) The use of the ladybird beetle, Cryptolaemus montrouzieri, for the control of coffee mealybugs. Journal of Coffee Research 8, 14–19.Google Scholar
Chang, G.C. (1996) Comparison of single versus multiple species of generalist predators for biological control. Environmental Entomology 25, 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clausen, C.P. (1978) Introduced Parasites and Predators of Arthropod Pests and Weeds: A World Review. USDA-ARG, Agriculture Handbook No. 480, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Cottrell, T.E. (2005) Predation and cannibalism of lady beetle eggs by adult lady beetles. Biological Control 34, 159–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottrell, T.E. & Yeargan, K.V. (1998) Intraguild predation between an introduced lady beetle, Harmonia axyridis (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), and a native lady beetle, Coleomegilla maculata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Journal of Kansas Entomological Society 71, 159–163.Google Scholar
Denno, R.F. & Finke, D.L. (2006) Multiple predator interactions and food-web connectance: implications for biological control. pp. 45–70 in Brodeur, J. & Boivin, G. (Eds) Trophic and Guild Interactions in Biological Control. Netherlands, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denoth, M., Frid, L. & Myers, J.H. (2002) Multiple agents in biological control: improving the odds? Biological Control 24, 20–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dethier, V.G. (1937) Cannibalism among lepidopterous larvae. Psyche 44, 110–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinesh, A.S. & Venkatesha, M.G. (2011 a) Prey consumption by mealybug predator, Spalgis epius on pink hibiscus mealybug (Maconellicoccus hirsutus) . Phytoparasitica 39, 11–17.Google Scholar
Dinesh, A.S. & Venkatesha, M.G. (2011 b) Predation of the apefly, Spalgis epius (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) on citrus mealybug, Planococcus citri (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). Biocontrol Science and Technology 21, 523–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinesh, A.S. & Venkatesha, M.G. (2012) Effect of temperature on the life history and demographic parameters of Spalgis epius (Westwood) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), a candidate biological control agent of mealybugs (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). Biocontrol Science and Technology 22, 1351–1361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinesh, A.S. & Venkatesha, M.G. (2013 a) Analysis of the territorial, courtship and coupling behavior of the hemipterophagous butterfly, Spalgis epius (Westwood) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Journal of Insect Behaviour 26, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinesh, A.S. & Venkatesha, M.G. (2013 b) A quantified ethogram for oviposition behavior and oviposition preference in the hemipterophagous butterfly Spalgis epius (Westwood) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Journal of Ethology 31, 71–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinesh, A.S., Venkatesha, M.G. & Ramakrishna, S. (2010) Development, life history characteristics and behaviour of mealybug predator, Spalgis epius (Westwood) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) on Planococcus citri (Risso) (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae). Journal of Pest Science 83, 339–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finke, D.L. & Denno, R.F. (2003) Intra-guild predation relaxes natural enemy impacts on herbivore populations. Ecological Entomology 28, 67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franco, J.C., Gross, S., Carvalho, C.J., Blumberg, D. & Mendel, Z. (2001) The citrus mealybug in citrus groves in Israel, Portugal and California: fruit injury and biological control as related to seasonal activity. Phytoparasitica 29, 86.Google Scholar
Gardiner, M.M. & Landis, D.A. (2007) Impact of intraguild predation by adult Harmonia axyridis (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) on Aphis glycines (Hemiptera: Aphididae) biological control in cage studies. Biological Control 40, 386–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfray, H.C.J. & Pacala, S.W. (1992) Aggregation and the population dynamics of parasitoids and predators. American Naturalist 140, 30–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grez, A.A., Viera, B. & Soares, A.O. (2012) Biotic interactions between Eriopis connexa and Hippodamia variegata, a native and an exotic coccinellid species associated with alfalfa fields in Chile. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 142, 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidari, M. & Copland, M.J.W. (1992) Host finding by Cryptolaemus montrouzieri (Col., Coccinellidae) a predator of mealybugs (Hom., Pseudococcidae). Entomophaga 37, 621–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironori, Y. & Katsuhiro, S. (1997) Cannibalism and interspecific predation in two predatory ladybirds in relation to prey abundance in the Weld. Entomophaga 42, 153–163.Google Scholar
Holt, R.D. & Polis, G.A. (1997) A theoretical framework for intraguild predation. American Naturalist 149, 745–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoogendoorn, M. & Heimpel, G.E. (2003) PCR-based gut content analysis of insect predators: use in field-caught predators. pp. 91–97 in Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods, Honolulu, Hawaii.Google Scholar
Joyce, A.L., Hoddle, M.S., Bellows, T.S. & Gonzalez, D. (2001) Oviposition Behaviour of Coccidoxenoides peregrinus, a parasitoid of Planococcus ficus . Entomologia Experimentalis et applicata 98, 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, C.W., Noh, Y.T. & Kim, J.I. (1968) Study on the natural enemies proper in Korea attacking fall webworm, Hyphantria cunea Drury. Entomological Research Bulletin 4, 17–36.Google Scholar
Koch, R.L., Hutchison, W.D., Venette, R.C. & Heimpel, G.E. (2003) Susceptibility of immature monarch butterfly, Danaus plexippus (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Danainae), to predation by Harmonia axyridis (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Biological Control 28, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Losey, J.E. & Denno, R.F. (1999) Factors facilitating synergistic predation: the central role of synchrony. Ecological Application 9, 378–386.Google Scholar
Lucas, E., Coderre, D. & Brodeur, J. (1998) Intraguild predation among aphid predators: characterization and influence of extraguild prey density. Ecology 79, 1084–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mani, M. (1995) Studies on the natural enemies of oriental mealybug, Planococcus lilacinus (CKll.) (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) in India. Journal of Entomological Research 19, 61–70.Google Scholar
Mani, M. & Thontadarya, T.S. (1987) Development and feeding potential of coccinellid predator Cryptolaemus montrouzieri Mul. on the grape mealybug, Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green). Journal of Biological Control 1, 19–22.Google Scholar
Mills, N. (2006) Interspecific competition among natural enemies and single versus multiple introductions in biological control. pp. 191–220 in Brodeur, J. & Boivin, G. (Eds) Trophic and Guild Interactions in Biological Control. Netherlands, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musser, F.R. & Shelton, A.M. (2003) Factors affecting the temporal and within-plant distribution of coccinellids in corn and their impact on potential intra-guild predation. Environmental Entomology 32, 575–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ng, S.M. (1988) Observations on the foraging behavior of starved aphidophagous coccinellid larvae (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) pp. 29–33 in Niemczyk, E. & Dixon, A.F.G. (Eds) Ecology and effectiveness of Aphidophaga. SPB Academic, The Hague.Google Scholar
Omkar, XX., Gupta, A.K. & Pervez, A. (2005) Attack, escape and predation rates of larvae of two aphidophagous ladybirds during conspecific and heterospecific interactions. Biocontrol Science and Technology 16, 295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perez-Jaggi, R. (1995) Yellow Variegation in Coleus blumei (Bentham) and Selected Life History Traits of Cryptolaemus montrouzieri Mulsant (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). MS Thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
Polis, G.A. & Holt, R. (1992) Intraguild predation: the dynamics of complex tropic interactions. Trends in Ecology and Evolutions 7, 151–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polis, G.A., Myers, C.A. & Holt, R.D. (1989) The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20, 297–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prasad, R.P. & Snyder, W.E. (2004) Predator interference limits fly egg biological control by a guild of ground-active beetles. Biological Control 31, 428–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenheim, J.A. (2005) Intraguild predation of Orius tristicolor by Geocoris spp. and the paradox of irruptive spider mite dynamics in California cotton. Biological Control 32, 172–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schausberger, P. & Walzer, A. (2001) Combined versus single species release of predaceous mites: predator–predator interactions and pest suppression. Biological Control 20, 269–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schellhorn, N.A. & Andow, D.A. (1999) Mortality of coccinellid (Coleoptera: Coleoptera) larvae and pupae when prey become scarce. Environmental Entomology 28, 1092–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serrano, M.S. & Lapointe, S.L. (2002) Evaluation of host plants and a meridic diet for rearing Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and its parasitoid Anagyrus kamali (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). Florida Entomologists 85, 417–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, C.R. & Yu, C.Y. (1985) An investigation on the natural enemies of Hyphantria cunea . Natural Enemies Insects 7, 91–94.Google Scholar
Snyder, W.E. & Ives, A.R. (2001) Generalist predators disrupt biological control by a specialist parasitoid. Ecology 82, 1571–1583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, W.E., Ballard, S.N., Yang, S., Clevenger, G.M., Miller, T.D., Ahn, J.J., Hatten, T.D. & Berryman, A.A. (2004) Complementary biocontrol of aphids by the ladybird beetle Harmonia axyridis and the parasitoid Aphelinus asychis on greenhouse roses. Biological Control 30, 229–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SPSS Inc. (2008) SPSS® for windows, Rel. 17.0.0. (Computer program) SPSS Inc. Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Straub, C.S. & Snyder, W.E. (2006) Species identity dominates the relationship between predator biodiversity and herbivore suppression. Ecology 87, 277–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Symondson, W.O.C., Sunderland, K.D. & Greenstone, M.H. (2002) Can generalist predators be effective biocontrol agents? Annual Review of Entomology 47, 561–594.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Venkatesha, M.G. (2005) Why is homopterophagous butterfly, Spalgis epius (Westwood) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) amyrmecophilous? Current Science 89, 245–246.Google Scholar
Venkatesha, M.G. & Dinesh, A.S. (2011) Mass rearing of Spalgis epius (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), a potential predator of mealybugs (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). Biocontrol Science and Technology 39, 929–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venkatesha, M.G. & Shashikumar, L. (2006) Natural balance between insect pests and their enemies in Biodiversity Park of Bangalore University. pp. 333–339 in Ignacimuthu, S.J. & Jayaraj, S. (Eds) Biodiversity and Insect Pest Management. New Delhi, Narosa Publishing House.Google Scholar
Venkatesha, M.G., Shashikumar, L. & Gayathri Devi, S.S. (2004) Protective devices of the carnivorous butterfly, Spalgis epius (Westwood) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Current Science 87, 571–572.Google Scholar
Wagner, D.J. & Wise, D.W. (1996) Cannibalism regulates densities of young wolf spiders: evidence from field and laboratory experiments. Ecology 77, 639–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilby, A. & Thomas, M.B. (2002) Natural enemy diversity and pest control: patterns of pest emergence with agricultural intensification. Ecology Letters 5, 353–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yasuda, H., Kikuchi, T. & Kindlmann, P. (2001) Relationships between attack and escape rates, cannibalism and intraguild predation in larvae of two predatory ladybirds. Journal of Insect Behavior 14, 373–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zar, J.H. (1984) Biostatistical Analysis. 2nd edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar