Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T10:27:30.728Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological and cytological separation of Amphorophora Buckton (Homoptera: Aphididae) feeding on European raspberry and blackberry (Rubus spp.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

R. L. Blackman ,
V. F. Eastop  and
M. Hills
R. L. Blackman
Affiliation:
British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK
V. F. Eastop
Affiliation:
British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK
M. Hills
Affiliation:
British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aphids of the genus Amphorophora collected from European raspberry, Rubus idaeus, have a chromosome complement of 2n(♀)=18, whereas Amphorophora from R. fruticosus agg. (blackberry, brambles) have a basic chromosome complement of 2n(♀)=20. Canonical variates analysis based on eight characters measured on numerous samples of apterous virginoparae showed that Amphorophora on European Rubus can be separated morphologically into two groups consistent with the differences in host plant and karyotype, and these two groups are concluded to be separate species. The correct name for the aphid on raspberry that is a vector of European raspberry viruses is Amphorophora idaei (Börn.), and the species on blackberry is A. rubi (Kalt.). Simple biometric methods of discriminating between A. idaei and A. rubi based on pairs of variables are suggested, and their reliability is discussed. Taxonomic problems in the European and North American Rubus-feeding species of Amphorophora are considered with particular reference to their importance in applied entomology.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 67 , Issue 2 , June 1977 , pp. 285 - 296
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

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

Ashton, E. H.., Healy, M. J. R. & Lipton, S.. (1957). The descriptive use of discriminant functions in physical anthropology.—Proc. Roy. Soc B. 146, 552–572.Google ScholarPubMed
Börner, C.. (1939). Neue Gattungen und Arten der mitteleuropäischen Aphidenfauna.—Arb. physiol. angew. Ent. Bed. 6, 75–83.Google Scholar
Briggs, J. B.. (1959). Three new strains of Amphorophora rubi (Kalt.) on cultivated raspberries in England.—Bull. ent. Res. 50, 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, J. B.. (1965). The distribution, abundance, and genetic relationships of four strains of the rubus aphid (Amphorophora rubi (Kalt.)) in relation to raspberry breeding.— J. hort. Sci. 40, 109–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dicker, G. H. L.. (1940). The biology of the Rubus aphides.—J. Pomol. 18, 1–33.Google Scholar
Hill, A. R.. (1953). Aphids associated with Rubus species in Scotland.–Entomologist's mon. Mag. 89, 298–303.Google Scholar
Hille Ris Lambers, D.. (1949). Contributions to a monograph of the Aphididae of Europe. IV.—Temminckia 8, 182–324+6 plates.Google Scholar
Huber, G. A. & Schwartze, C. D.. (1938). Resistance in the red raspberry to the mosaic vector Amphorophora rubi Kalt.—J. agric. Res. 57, 623–633.Google Scholar
Kaltenbach, J. H.. (1843). Monographie der Familien der Pflanzenlause (Phytophthires).— 222 pp.+1 p. corrections+1 plate. Aachen, P. Fagot.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, J. S.., Day, M. F. & Eastop, V. F.. (1962). A conspectus of aphids as vectors of plant viruses. — 114 pp. London, Commonwealth Institute of Entomology.Google Scholar
Major, J.. (1829). A treatise on the insects most prevalent on fruit trees, and garden produce.— 302 pp. London, Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown and Green.Google Scholar
Robinson, A. G. & Chen, Y. H.. (1969). Cytotaxonomy of Aphididae.— Can. J. Zool. 47,511–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schouteden, H.. (1906). Catalogue des Aphides de Belgique.— Mem. Soc. r. ent. Belg. 12,189–246.Google Scholar