Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T00:58:04.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EVIDENCE OF A MALE SEX PHEROMONE IN THE EUROPEAN CORN BORER, OSTRINIA NUBILALIS (HÜBNER) (LEPIDOPTERA: PYRALIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Lucie Royer  and
Jeremy N. McNeil
Lucie Royer
Affiliation:
Département de biologie, Université Laval, Sainte-Foy, Québec, CanadaG1K 7P4
Jeremy N. McNeil
Affiliation:
Département de biologie, Université Laval, Sainte-Foy, Québec, CanadaG1K 7P4
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

European corn borer males have hair pencils located ventrally on the 8th sternite and these are extruded when a male approaches a calling female. The fact that (i) antennectomized females mated significantly less than both intact controls and individuals subjected to other forms of surgery, and (ii) males with hair pencils removed had a significantly lower mating success than control males, suggests that a male pheromone is involved in the mating system of the European corn borer.

Résumé

Les pinceaux androconiaux des mâles de la pyrale du maïs sont situés ventralement sur le 8ième sternite et sont exposés lorsqu’un mâle approche une femelle en appel. Le succès d’accouplement des femelles sans antenne est significativement moindre que celui obtenu pour des femelles intactes ou soumises à d’autres formes de chirurgie. De plus, le succès d’accouplement des mâles dont les pinceaux androconiaux ont été enlevés, est plus faible que celui des témoins. Ces résultats appuient l’hypothèse qu’une phéromone mâle est impliquée au cours de l’accouplement de la pyrale du maïs.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 124 , Issue 1 , February 1992 , pp. 113 - 116
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

Baker, T.C., and Cardé, R.T.. 1979. Courtship behavior of the Oriental fruit moth (Grapholitha molesta): Experimental analysis and consideration of the role of sexual selection in the evolution of courtship pheromones in the Lepidoptera. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 72: 173–188.Google Scholar
Birch, M.C., Poppy, G.M., and Baker, T.C.. 1990. Scents and eversible scent structures of male moths. A. Rev. Ent. 35: 25–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boppré, M. 1986. Insects pharmacophagously using defensive plant chemicals (pyrrolizidine alkaloids). Natuw. 73: 17–26.Google Scholar
Carpenter, J.E., and Sparks, A.N.. 1982. Effects of vision on mating behavior of the male corn earworm. J. econ. Ent. 75: 248–250.Google Scholar
Charlton, R.E., and Cardé, R.T.. 1990. Orientation of male gypsy moths, Lymantria dispar (L.), to pheromone sources: The role of olfactory and visual cues. J. Insect Behav. 3: 443–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connor, W.E., Eisner, T., Vandermeer, R.K., Guerrero, A., and Meinwald, J.. 1981. Precopulatory sexual interaction in an arctiid moth (Utetheisa ornatrix): Role of a pheromone derived from dietary alkaloids. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 9: 227–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everitt, B.S. 1977. The Analysis of Contingency Tables. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzpatrick, S.M., and McNeil, J.N.. 1988. Male scent in lepidopteran communication: The role of male pheromone in mating behaviour of Pseudaletia unipuncta (Haw.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 146: 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, D.B., and Hayes, D.K.. 1982. Methods and markers for synchronizing maturation of the fifth-stage larvae and pupae of the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 75: 485–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glover, T.J., Tang, X.H., and Roelofs, W.L.. 1987. Sex pheromone blend discrimination by the male moths from E and Z strains of European corn borer. J. Chem. Ecol. 13: 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, G.G. 1976. Courtship behavior of a phycitid moth, Vitula edmandsae. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 69: 445–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, G.G. 1978. Morphology of the presumed male pheromone glands on the forewings of tortricid and phycitid moths. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 71: 423–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, G.G., and Brady, U.E.. 1975. Courtship behavior of phycitid moths. I. Comparison of Plodia interpunctella and Cadra cautella and the role of male scent glands. Can. J. Zool. 53: 813–826.Google Scholar
Hendrickse, A. 1986. Intra- and interspecific sex-pheromone communication in the Yponomeuta. Physiol. Ent. 11: 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirai, K. 1981. Morphology of the brush organs of the Limabean pod borer, Etiella zinckenella Treitschke (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Appl. Ent. Zool. 16: 362–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klun, J.A., and Cooperators. 1975. Insect sex pheromones: Intraspecific pheromonal variability of Ostrinia nubilalis in North America and Europe. Environ. Ent. 4: 891–894.Google Scholar
Klun, J.A., and Huettel, M.D.. 1988. Genetic regulation of sex pheromone production and response: Interaction of sympatric pheromonal types of European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). J. Chem. Ecol. 14: 2047–2061.Google Scholar
Krasnoff, S.B., Bjostad, L.B., and Roelofs, W.L.. 1987. Quantitative and qualitative variation in male pheromones of Phragmatobia fuliginosa and Pyrrharctia isabella (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae). J. Chem. Ecol. 13: 807–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasnoff, S.B., and Roelofs, W.L., 1989. Quantitative and qualitative effects of larval diet on male scent secretions of Estigmene acrea, Phragmatobia fuliginosa and Pyrrharctia isabella (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae). J. Chem. Ecol. 15: 1077–1093.Google Scholar
Krasnoff, S.B., and Vick, K.W.. 1984. Male wing-gland pheromone of Ephestia elutella. J. Chem. Ecol. 10: 667–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorey, H.H., and Hale, R.L.. 1965. Mass rearing of the larvae of nine noctuid species on a simple artificial medium. J. econ. Ent. 58: 522–524.Google Scholar
Spangler, H.G. 1985. Sound production and communication by the greater wax moth (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 78: 54–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spangler, H.G., Greenfield, M.G., and Takessian, A.. 1984. Ultrasonic mate calling in the lesser wax moth. Physiol. Ent. 9: 87–95.Google Scholar
Zagatti, P. 1981. Comportement sexuel de la pyrale de la canne à sucre Eldana saccharina (Wlk.) lié à deux phéromones émises par le mâle. Behav. 78: 81–98.Google Scholar