Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:05:12.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Direction of dispersion of cochineal (Dactylopius coccus Costa) within the Americas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Luis C. Rodríguez
Affiliation:
Departamento de Ciencias Ecológicas, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Chile, Casilla 653, Santiago, Chile.
Marco A. Méndez
Affiliation:
Departamento de Ciencias Ecológicas, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Chile, Casilla 653, Santiago, Chile.
Hermann M. Niemeyer
Affiliation:
Departamento de Ciencias Ecológicas, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Chile, Casilla 653, Santiago, Chile.

Extract

Dactylopius coccus has been used in Mexico and Peru as a source of natural dyes since pre-Columbian times. A phylogenetic analysis of the genus Dactylopius, and the disjoint distribution of D. coccus, suggest that the origin of D. coccus is South America and was introduced into North America by sea routes.

Type
News & Notes
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 2001

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

References

Baranyovitz, F.L.C 1979. An ancient dye with a modern role, Endeavour 2: 8592.Google Scholar
Brana, D.D. 1964. Cochineal: aboriginal dyestuff from Nueva España, in Actas y Memorias del XXXVI Congreso Internacional de Americanistas: 7791. Austin (TX): University of Texas, Department of Geography.Google Scholar
Brown, J. & Lomolino, M.. 1998. Biogeography. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Brucher, H. 1988. Migration and dispersion of American useful plants over the isthmus of Darien-Panama, Naturwissenschaften 75: 1826.Google Scholar
Brucher, H. 1990. Transamerican diffusion of useful neotropical vegetables in the pre-Columbian epoch, in Posey, D.A. & Overal, W.L. (ed.), Ethnobiology: implications and applications: 26584. Belem: Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi.Google Scholar
Fester, G.A. 1943. Los colorantes del antiguo Perú, Archeion 25: 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foldi, 1.1997. Defense strategies in scale insects: phylogenetic inference and evolutionary scenarios (Hemiptera: Coccoidea), in Grandcolas, P. (ed.). The origin of biodiversity in insects: phylogenetic tests of evolutionary scenarios: 20330. Paris: Mémoires Musée National Histoire Naturelle.Google Scholar
Kitching, I.J., Lorey, P.L., Humphries, C.J. & Williams, D.M.. 1998. Cladistics: the theory and practice of parsimony analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Madison, W.P., Donoghue, M.J. & Maddison, D.R.. 1984. Outgroup analysis and parsimony, Systematic Zoology 33: 83103.Google Scholar
Mann, J. 1969. Cactus-feeding insects and mites. Washington (DC): US National Museum. Bulletin 256.Google Scholar
Pelham, W.N. 1963. A thousand years of cochineal: a lost but traditional Mexican industry is on its way back, American Dyestuff Reporter 52: 5361.Google Scholar
Pérez Guerra, G. & Kosztarab, M.. 1992. Biosystematics of the family Dactylopiidae (Homoptera: Coccínea) with emphasis on the life cycle of Dactylopius coccus Costa. Studies on the morphology and systematics of scale insects N 16. Blacksburg (VA): Virginia Agricultural Experimental Station. VAES Bulletin 92.Google Scholar
Saltzman, M. 1992. Identifying dyes in textiles, American Scientist 80: 47481.Google Scholar
Swofkord, D.L. 1993. PAUP 3.1. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony. Distributed by Illinois Natural History Museum.Google Scholar
Wolters, B. 1999. Dispersion and ethnobotany of the cacao tree and other amerindian crop plants, Journal of Applied Botany 73: 12837.Google Scholar
Yacovleff, E. & Muelle, J. C.. 1934. Notas al trabajo ‘Colorantes de Paracas’, Revista del Museo Nacional del Peni 3:15763.Google Scholar

References for TABLES

Aquino, G. 1990. Estudio cromosómico de cuatro tipos de cochinilla [Dactylopius spp.) (Homoptera : Dactylopiidae) del nopal. MSc thesis, Colegio de Postgraduados, México.Google Scholar
De Hako, M. 1996. Morfología de formas inmaduras y adultos de Dactylopius ceylonicus (Homoptera, Dactylopiidae), Revista de la Sociedad Entomológica Argentina 55: 17988.Google Scholar
De Haro, M. & Claps, L.. 1995. Conociendo nuestra fauna 111: Familia Dactylopiidae (Insecto: Homoptera): morfología, biología e importancia económica. Tucumán (Argentina): Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Instituto Miguel Lillo. Serie Monográfica y Didáctica 19.Google Scholar
Gilreath, M.E. & Smith, J.W.. 1985. Bionomics of Dactylopius confusus (Homoptera: Dactylopiidae), Annals of the Entomological Society of America 80: 76874.Google Scholar
Mann, J, 1969. Cactus-feeding insects and mites. Washington (DC): US National Museum. Bulletin 256.Google Scholar
Marin, R. & Cisneros, V.. 1977. Biología y morfología de Ia cochinilla del carmín, Dactylopius coccus Cosía (Homoptera: Dactylopiidae), Revista peruana de Entomología 20: 11520.Google Scholar
Müntiel, M.L. 1995. Morfología de Dactylopius coccus Costa (Homoptera: Dactylopidae), y su biología y producción en dos fotopüríodos. MSc thesis, Colegio de Postgraduados, México.Google Scholar
Moran, V.C. & Cobby, B.S.. 1979. On the life-history and fecundity of the cochineal insect, Dactylopius austrinus De Lotto (Homoptera: Dactylopiidae), a biological control agent for the cactus Opuntia aurantiaca, Bulletin of Entomological Research 69: 62936.Google Scholar
Pérez Guerra, G. & Kosztarab, M.. 1992. Biosystematics of the family Dactylopiidae (Homoptera: Coccínea) with emphasis on the life cycle Dactylopius coccus Costa. Studies on the morphology and systematics of scale insects N 16. Blacksburg (VA): Virginia Agricultural Experimental Station. VAES Bulletin 92.Google Scholar