Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T09:59:12.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EFFECT OF FOOD SOURCES ON THE LONGEVITY AND FECUNDITY OF PHOLETESOR ORNIGIS (WEED) (HYMENOPTERA: BRACONIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Elmer A.C. Hagley  and
D.R. Barber
Elmer A.C. Hagley
Affiliation:
Agriculture Canada Research Station, Vineland Station, Ontario, Canada L0R 2E0
D.R. Barber
Affiliation:
Agriculture Canada Research Station, Vineland Station, Ontario, Canada L0R 2E0
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The fecundity of first-generation adult Pholetesor ornigis (Weed) increased when individuals were confined with flowers of creeping "Charlie" (Glechoma hederacea L.), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale Weber), and apple (Malus domesticus L.), but not with blossoms of chickweed [Stellaria media (L.) Cyrillo] or Shepherd’s purse [Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medic]. Longevity of P. ornigis was little affected. The fecundity of second-generation P. ornigis increased when individuals were confined with terminal leaves of apple with honeydew of the aphid Aphis pomi DeGeer, but not when confined with terminal leaves without honeydew or with flowers of round-leaved mallow (Malva neglecta Wallr.) or red clover (Trifolium pratense L.). Longevity of P. ornigis adults also increased when they were provided with aphid honeydew. There were significant differences between the total number (oviposited and ovarian) of eggs produced by second-generation females given different food sources. Those given aphid honeydew oviposited a greater proportion of their eggs than those confined with apple leaves without honeydew or with flowers of M. neglecta or T. pratense, Adult P. ornigis fed an aqueous solution of honey (50:50, v/v) lived longest and produced more eggs than those provided with any other food source.

Résumé

La fécondité des adultes de la première génération de Pholetesor ornigis (Weed) augmente chez les individus enfermés avec des fleurs du glécome lierre (Glechoma hederacea L.), du pissenlit (Taraxacum officinale Weber), ou du pommier (Malus domesticus L.), mais pas chez les individus enfermés avec des fleurs de la stellaire moyenne [Stellaria media (L.) Cyrillo] ou de la capselle bourse à pasteur [Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medic]. La longévité de l’espèce est peu affectée par la nature de la plante. La fécondité des adultes de seconde génération de P. ornigis augmente chez les individus enfermés avec des feuilles terminales de pommiers garnies de miellat du puceron Aphis pomi DeGeer. mais pas chez les individus enfermés avec des feuiles terminales sans miellat ou avec des fleurs de la mauve négligée (Malva neglecta Wallr.) ou du trèfle des champs (Trifolium pratense L.). La présence de miellat augmente également la longévité de P. ornigis. Il y a des différences significatives entre le nombre total d’oeufs (pondus ou encore dans l’ovaire) produits par la seconde génération de femelles, selon la nature de la nourriture qu’elles reçoivent. Les femelles nourries de miellat pondent une plus grande proportion de leurs oeufs que les femelles enfermées avec des feuilles de pommiers sans miellat ou avec des fleurs de M. neglecta ou de T. pratense. Les adultes de P. ornigis nourris d’une solution aqueuse de miel (50 : 50, v/v) vivent plus longtemps et produisent plus d’oeufs que les femelles soumises à tout autre régime alimentaire.

[Traduit par la rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 124 , Issue 2 , April 1992 , pp. 341 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1992

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

Bentley, B.L. 1977. Extrafloral nectaries and protection by pugnacious body guards. A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 8: 407–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boush, G.M., Baerwald, R.J., and Miyazaki, S.. 1969. Development of a chemically defined diet for adults of the apple maggot based on amino acid analysis of honeydew. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 62: 19–21.Google Scholar
Campbell, R.J., Fell, R.D., and Marini, R.P.. 1990. Characterization of apple nectar sugars in selected commercial and crab apple cultivars. Fruit Var. J. 44: 136–141.Google Scholar
Duspiva, F. 1954. Weitere Untersuchungen uber stoffmechsel-physiologische Beziehungen zwischen Rhyncoten und ihren Wirtspflanzen. Mitt. biol. Bundesanstalt Land – u. Fortwirtsch Berlin-Dahlem 80: 155–162. [Cited in Auclair, J.L. 1963. Aphid feeding and nutrition. A. Rev. Ent. 8: 439–490.]Google Scholar
Dutcher, J.D., and Howitt, A.J.. 1978. Bionomics and control of Lithocolletis blancardella in Michigan. J. econ. Ent. 71: 736–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, M.A., and Ruesink, W.G.. 1986. Impact of common chickweed, Stellaria media, upon parasitism of Agrotis ipsilon (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) by Meteorus rubens (Nees von Esenbeck). J. Kansas ent. Soc. 59: 343–349.Google Scholar
Hagley, E.A.C. 1985. Parasites recovered from the overwintering generation of the spotted tentiform leafminer, Phyllonorycter blancardella (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) in pest-management apple orchards in southern Ontario. Can. Ent. 117: 371–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagley, E.A.C., and Barber, D.R.. 1986. Preference of Pholetesor ornigis (Hym.: Braconidae) for the sapfeeding larvae of its host, the spotted tentiform leafminer, Phyllonorycter blancardella (Lep.: Gracillariidae). Entomophaga 31: 393–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holliday, N.J., and Hagley, E.A.C.. 1984. The effect of sod type on the occurrence of ground bettles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in a pest management apple orchard. Can. Ent. 116: 165–171.Google Scholar
Johnson, E.F., Laing, J.E., and Trottier, R.. 1976. The seasonal occurrence of Lithocolletis blancardella (Gracillariidae), and its major natural enemies in Ontario apple orchards. Proc. ent. Soc. Ont. 107: 31–46.Google Scholar
Leius, K. 1967. Influence of wild flowers on parasitism of tent caterpillar and codling moth. Can. Ent. 99: 444–446.Google Scholar
McKinney, T.R., and Pass, B.C.. 1977. Effects of various foods on the reproduction of Bathyplectes curculionis (Thompson) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). J. Kansas ent. Soc. 50: 523–528.Google Scholar
Pottinger, R.P., and LeRoux, E.J.. 1971. The biology and dynamics of Lithocolletis blancardella (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) on apple in Quebec. Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 77: 437 pp.Google Scholar
Pree, D.J., Hagley, E.A.C., Simpson, C.M., and Hikichi, A.. 1980. Resistance of the spotted tentiform leafminer, Phyllonorycter blancardella (Fabr.), (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) to organophosphorus insecticides in southern Ontario. Can. Ent. 112: 469–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putman, Wm.L. 1963. Nectar of peach leaf glands as insect food. Can. Ent. 95: 108–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgway, N.M., and Mahr, D.L.. 1990. Reproduction, development and longevity of Pholetesor ornigis (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a parasitoid of spotted tentiform leafminer (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae), in the laboratory. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 83: 790–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute. 1985. SAS Users Guide: Statistics, 5th ed. SAS Institute, Cary, NC. 956 pp.Google Scholar
Schäller, G. 1961. Aminosauren in Speichel und Honigtau der grunen Appelblattlaus Aphis pomi DeG. Entomologia exp. appl. 4: 73–85. [Cited in Auclair, J.L. 1962. Aphid feeding and nutrition. A. Rev. Ent. 8: 439–490.Google Scholar
Syme, P.D. 1975. The effects of flowers on the longevity and fecundity of two native parasites of the European pine shoot moth in Ontario. Environ. Ent. 4: 337–346.Google Scholar
Weires, R.W., Davis, D.R., Leeper, J.R., and Reissig, W.H.. 1980. Distribution and parasitism of gracillariid leafminers on apple in the northeast. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 73: 541–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolcott, G.N. 1942. The requirement of parasites for more than their hosts. Science 96: 317–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woodcock, E.F., and Tullis, E.C.. 1928. Extra floral glands of Malus malus and Pyrus communis. Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Lett. 8: 239–243.Google Scholar