Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T16:36:54.861Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Growth-Changes and Structure of the Egg of the African Migratory Locust, Locusta migratoria migratorioides, R. & F. (Orthoptera, Acrididae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Mithan Lal Roonwal
Mithan Lal Roonwal
Affiliation:
(From the Entomology Department, Zoological Laboratory, Cambridge.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The eggs of Locusta migratoria migratorioides, R. & F., increase in size during development. The increase is due to the absorption of water from the surrounding moist soil.

The wet weight of a freshly laid egg is 0·0063±0·0008 gms, and of a fully developed egg 0·014±0·002 gms. The dry weight of a freshly laid egg is 0·003± 0·0004 gms. and of a fully developed egg 0·0024±0·0002 gms. The water-content of an egg increases from 51·92±3·53 per cent, of the wet weight in the freshly laid egg to 82·36±2·14 per cent, in the fully developed egg.

The egg-wall consists of an exo- and endochorion and a thick vitelline membrane. The latter has a felt-like structure in the freshly laid egg, but as the egg develops, this membrane increases in thickness and acquires a laminated character.

The micropylar apparatus consists of a ring of about 35–43 oblique, funnelshaped canals arranged round the egg near its posterior end.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , February 1936 , pp. 1 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1936

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

Austin, M. D. (1931). Ent. Mon. Mag. 67.Google Scholar
Austin, M. D. (1932). J. R. Hort. Soc. 57.Google Scholar
Bischoff, H. (1927). Biologic der Hymenopteren. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blochmann, F. (1887). Morph. Jahrb. 15.Google Scholar
Bodine, J. H. (1925). J. Exp. Zool. 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buxton, P. A. (1932). Biol. Reviews 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, F. L. (1929). Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dampf, A. (1925). Monogr. Inst. Hig. Num. 3, Mexico.Google Scholar
Donisthorpe, H. J. K. (1927). British ants. London.Google Scholar
Enslin, E. (1914). Die Blatt- und Holzwespen (Tenthredinoidea). In Chr. Schröder “ Die Insekten Mitteleuropas,” Bd. 3.Google Scholar
Farkas, K. (1903). Pflügers Arch. 98.Google Scholar
Fedorov, S. M. (1927). Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graber, V. (1888). Denkschr. Akad. Wiss. Wien 55.Google Scholar
Gray, J. (1926). J. Exp. Biol. 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallez, P. (1885). C. R. Acad. Sci. 101.Google Scholar
Hallez, P. (1886). C. R. Acad. Sci. 103.Google Scholar
Heymons, R. (1895). Die Embryonalentwicklung von Dermapteren und Orthopteren. Jena.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husain, M. A. & Roonwal, M. L. (1933). Ind. J. Agric. Sci. 3.Google Scholar
Imms, A. D. (1934). A general text-book of entomology. 3rd edn.London.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. J. (1928). Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.Google Scholar
Johnson, C. G. (1934). Trans. Soc. Brit. Ent. 1.Google Scholar
Kerenski, J. (1930). Z. angew. Ent. 16.Google Scholar
Korschelt, E. (1887). Nova Acta Acad. Leop. Carol. 2.Google Scholar
La Baume, W. (1918). Monogr. angew. Ent., Nr. 3.Google Scholar
Leuckart, R. (1855). Arch. f. Anat. u. Physiol.Google Scholar
Leuzinger, H. (1925). Zur Kenntniss der Anatomic und Entwicklungsgeschichte von Carausius morosus Br. I. Jena.Google Scholar
Manton, S. M. (1928). Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond., B. 216.Google Scholar
Mcnabb, J. W. (1928). J. Morph. 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelsen, O. E. (1931). J. Morph. 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikolsky, V. V. (1925). The Asiatic Locust. (In Russian.) Leningrad.Google Scholar
Packard, A. S. (1878). 1st Ann. Rep. U.S. Ent. Comm.Google Scholar
Patten, W. (1884). Quart. J. Micr. Sci. 24.Google Scholar
Peacock, A. D. (1928). Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. Edinb. 21.Google Scholar
Plotnikov, V. J. (1926). Insects injurious to cultivated plants in Central Asia. (In Russian.) Tashkent.Google Scholar
Rathke, M. (1844). Arch. f. Anat. u. Physiol.Google Scholar
Roonwal, M. L. (1935). Zool. Anz. 110.Google Scholar
Slifer, E. H. (1930). Physiol. Zool. 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slifer, E. H. (1934). J. Exp. Zool. 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L. B. & Hadley, C. H. (1926). Circ. U.S. Dept. Agric., No. 363.Google Scholar
Steer, W. (1929). Ent. Mon. Mag. 65.Google Scholar
Thorpe, W. H. (1930). Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.Google Scholar
Tichomiroff, A. (1885). Z. physiol. Chemie 9.Google Scholar
Torre-Bueno, J. R. de la. (1920). Bull. Brooklyn Ent. Soc. 15.Google Scholar
Uvarov, B. P. (1928). Locusts and Grasshoppers. London.Google Scholar
Wheeler, W. M. (1889). J. Morph. 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, W. M. (1893). J. Morph. 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar