Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T13:26:04.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ATTRACTIVENESS AND SUITABILITY OF HOST TREE SPECIES FOR COLONIZATION AND SURVIVAL OF PHORACANTHA SEMIPUNCTATA (COLEOPTERA: CERAMBYCIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

T.D. Paine ,
L.M. Hanks ,
J.G. Millar  and
E.O. Paine
T.D. Paine*
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Califomia, Riverside, California, United States 92521
L.M. Hanks
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Califomia, Riverside, California, United States 92521
J.G. Millar
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Califomia, Riverside, California, United States 92521
E.O. Paine
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Califomia, Riverside, California, United States 92521
*
1 Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed (E-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Among the three species of potential hosts for Phoracantha semipunctata (F.) (Eucalyptus propinqua Deane and Maiden, Eucalyptus maculata Hook., and Angophora costata (Gaertner) Britten (all Myrtaceae)) tested in southeast Queensland, there were no differences in number of beetle galleries initiated by neonate larvae, larval mortality, larval survivorship, or parasitism rates. The larvae that survived to pupation in E. maculata produced significantly larger galleries, indicating larger larval size, than did larvae in either of the other two host species tested. There were no differences in the size of parasitized larvae among the three species of potential hosts. The results suggest that there were differences among species in host suitability for larval development but that females were either not able to distinguish those differences during oviposition or the selection for discrimination was not strong relative to the associated potential ecological costs.

Résumé

Chez les trois espèces d’hôtes potentiels de Phoracantha semipunctata (F.), (Eucalyptus propinqua Deane et Maiden, Eucalyptus maculata Hook, et Angophora costata (Gaertner) Britten (tous trois des Myrtaceae)) testées dans le sud-est du Queensland, le nombre de tunnels creusés par les larves neonates, la mortalité larvaire, la survie des larves et les taux de parasitisme ne différaient pas. Le larves qui ont survécu jusqu’à la nymphose chez E. maculata ont creusé des tunnels plus grands que les larves vivant sur les deux autres espèces-hôtes, ce qui reflète leur taille plus grande. La taille des larves parasitées était la même chez les trois espèces d’hôtes. Ces résultats indiquent qu’il existe bel et bien des différences entre les espèces hôtes quant à leur capacité d’assurer le développement des larves, mais les femelles sont incapables de distinguer ces différences au moment de la ponte, ou alors la sélection qui favorise la discrimination est faible comparativement aux coûts écologiques potentiels associés.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 132 , Issue 6 , December 2000 , pp. 907 - 913
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2000

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

Duffy, E.A.J. 1963. A monograph of the immature stages of Australasian timber beetles (Cerambycidae). London: British Museum of Natural HistoryGoogle Scholar
FAO. 1981. Eucalypts for planting. FAO Forestry Series No. 11. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Tirado, L. 1987. Tabla de vida para Phoracantha semipunctata Fab. (Col. Cerambycidae). Perforador de los eucaliptos en el sudoeste español. Boletin de Sanidad Vegetal, Plagas 13: 283–301Google Scholar
Grimble, D.G., Knight, F.B. 1970. Life table and mortality factors for Saperda inornata (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 63: 1309–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Millar, J.G., Paine, T.D. 1991 a. An evaluation of cold temperatures and density as mortality factors of the eucalyptus longhorned borer (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in California. Environmental Entomology 20: 1653–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G. 1991 b. Mechanisms of resistance in Eucalyptus against the larvae of the eucalyptus longhorned borer (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in California. Environmental Entomology 20: 1583–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., McElfresh, J.S., Millar, J.G., Paine, T.D. 1993 a. Phoracantha semipunctata F. (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae), a serious pest of Eucalyptus in California: biology and laboratory rearing conditions. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 86: 96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G. 1993 b. Host species preference and larval performance in the wood-boring beetle Phoracantha semipunctata F. Oecologia (Berlin) 95: 22–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G., Hom, J.L. 1995 a. Variation among Eucalyptus species in resistance to eucalyptus longhomed borer in southern California. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 74: 185–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Gould, J.R., Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G. 1995 b. Biology and host relations of Avetianella longoi, an egg parasitoid of the Eucalyptus longhorned borer. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 88: 666–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Millar, J.G., Paine, T.D. 1995 c. Biological constraints on host-range expansion by the wood-boring beetle Phoracantha semipunctata (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 88: 183–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Millar, J.G., Paine, T.D. 1996 a. Body size influences mating success of the eucalyptus longhomed borer (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Journal of Insect Behavior 9: 369–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Millar, J.G., Paine, T.D. 1996 b. Mating behavior of the eucalyptus longhorned borer (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) and the adaptive significance of long “horns.” Journal of Insect Behavior 9: 383–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G. 1996 c. Tiny wasp helps protect eucalypts from eucalyptus longhomed borer. California Agriculture 50: 14–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G. 1998. Dispersal of the eucalyptus longhorned borer (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in urban landscapes. Environmental Entomology 27: 1418–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G., Campbell, C.D., Schuch, U.K. 1999. Water relations of host trees and resistance to the phloem-boring beetle Phoracantha semipunctata F. (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Oecologia (Berlin) 119: 400–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, L.M., Millar, J.G., Paine, T.D., Wang, Q., Paine, E.O. 2000. Patterns of host utilization by two parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) of the eucalyptus longhorned borer (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Biological Control. In pressGoogle Scholar
Honêk, A. 1993. Intraspecific variation in body size and fecundity in insects: a general relationship. Oikos 66: 483–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikeda, K. 1979. Consumption and food utilization by individual larvae and the population of the wood borer Phymatoides maaki Kraatz (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Oecologia (Berlin) 40: 287–98CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mendel, Z. 1985. Seasonal development of the eucalypt borer, Phoracantha semipunctata, in Israel. Phytoparasitica 13: 85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendel, Z., Golan, Y., Mandar, Z. 1984. Studies on the phenology and some mortality factors of the eucalyptus borer, Phoracantha semipunctata in Israel. La-Yaaram 34: 41–4Google Scholar
Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G., Bellows, T.S. Jr, Hanks, L.M., Gould, J.R. 1993. Integrating classical biological control with plant health in the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture 19: 125–30Google Scholar
Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G., Hanks, L.M. 1995. Biology of the eucalyptus longhomed borer in California and development of an integrated management program for the urban forest. California Agriculture 49: 34–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, T.D., Millar, J.G., Bellows, T.S., Hanks, L.M. 1997. Enlisting an underappreciated clientele: public participation in distribution and evaluation of natural enemies in urban landscapes. American Entomologist 43: 163–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pooke, E.W., Forrester, R.I. 1984. Factors influencing dieback of drought-affected dry scleophyll forest tree species. Australian Forestry Research 14: 201–17Google Scholar
Powell, W. 1978. Colonization of twelve species of Eucalyptus by Phoracantha semipunctata (F.) (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in Malawi. Bulletin of Entomological Research 68: 621–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, W. 1982. Age-specific life table data for the Eucalyptus boring beetle, Phoracantha semipunctata (F.) (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in Malawi. Bulletin of Entomological Research 72: 645–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, A.H. 1957. Some notes on the biology of Monochamus scutellatus (Say) (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). The Canadian Entomologist 89: 547–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. 1988. SAS/STAT Users's guide, version 6.03 edition. Cary: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Shibata, E. 1987. Oviposition schedules, survivorship curves, and mortality factors within trees of two cerambycid beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae), the Japanese sawyer, Monochamus alternatus Hope, and sugi bark borer, Semanotus japonicus Lacordaire. Researches in Population Ecology 29: 347–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R.R., Rolhf, F.J. 1981. Biometry. New York: WH Freeman and Co.Google Scholar
Sopow, S.L., Quiring, D.T. 1998. Body size of spruce-galling adelgids is positively related to realized fecundity in nature. Ecological Entomology 23: 476–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Q., Thornton, I.W.B., New, T.R. 1996. Biogeography of the phoracanthine beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Journal of Biogeography 23: 75–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacharin, R.F. 1978. Emigrant eucalypts. Gum trees as exotics. Carlton: Melbourne University PressGoogle Scholar