Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T00:05:46.647Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Daily oviposition pattern of Lambdina fiscellaria (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) under laboratory conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Richard Berthiaume ,
Christian Hébert ,
Luc Lamontagne ,
Isabelle Picard  and
Éric Bauce
Richard Berthiaume*
Affiliation:
Département des Sciences du bois et de la forêt, Faculté de foresterie et de géomatique, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada G1K 7P4
Christian Hébert
Affiliation:
Centre de foresterie des Laurentides, Service canadien des forêts, Ressources naturelles Canada, Québec, Québec, Canada G1V 4C7
Luc Lamontagne
Affiliation:
Genivar, 1125 boulevard Sacré-Cœur, Saint-Félicien, Québec, Canada G8K 1P6
Isabelle Picard
Affiliation:
Campus de Charlesbourg, CEGEP de Limoilou, Québec, Québec, Canada G1H 7L4
Éric Bauce
Affiliation:
Département des Sciences du bois et de la forêt, Faculté de foresterie et de géomatique, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada G1K 7P4
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The hemlock looper, Lambdina fiscellaria, is one of the most economically damaging defoliators of North American coniferous forests. Basic information on its reproductive biology is an essential prerequisite for understanding its population dynamics. Realized fecundity for the two major hemlock looper ecotypes varies along a latitudinal gradient in eastern Canada, but their daily oviposition patterns are similar. Mated females lay eggs after a short pre-oviposition period, with daily oviposition peaking in the first 3 days. Mated females lay significantly more eggs than unmated ones, the latter laying their eggs more evenly throughout their life. Eggs deposited early in the oviposition period are larger than those deposited near the end. This may influence over-winter survival of hemlock loopers and should be considered in studies to better understand the population dynamics and improve management of this defoliator.

Résumé

L'arpenteuse de la pruche, Lambdina fiscellaria, est l'un des plus importants défoliateurs des forêts de conifères de l'Amérique du Nord. Obtenir l'information de base sur la biologie reproductrice d'un ravageur est une condition préalable essentielle pour comprendre la dynamique de ses populations. Des variations de fécondité sont connues pour les deux écotypes majeurs de l'arpenteuse de la pruche le long d'un gradient latitudinal, dans l'est du Canada, mais leur taux de ponte journalière est similaire. Les femelles accouplées pondent rapidement des œufs après une courte période de préoviposition, le maximum survenant dans les 3 premiers jours suivant le début de l'oviposition. Les femelles accouplées pondent significativement plus d'oeufs que les femelles non accouplées et ces dernières montrent un patron de ponte journalière plus uniforme pendant toute leur vie. Par ailleurs, les œufs pondus au début de la période de ponte sont plus volumineux que ceux déposés vers la fin de cette période. Cette différence pourrait influencer la survie hivernale de l'arpenteuse de la pruche et devrait faire l'objet d'études afin de mieux comprendre la dynamique des populations et améliorer la gestion de ce défoliateur.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 141 , Issue 3 , June 2009 , pp. 309 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2009

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

Berrigan, D. 1991. The allometry of egg size and number in insects. Oikos, 60: 313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berthiaume, R. 2007. Écologie évolutive des populations d'arpenteuse de la pruche. Ph.D. thesis, Université Laval, Québec City, Quebec.Google Scholar
Berthiaume, R., Bauce, É., Hébert, C., and Brodeur, J. 2007. Developmental polymorphism in Newfoundland population of the hemlock looper, Lambdina fiscellaria (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). Environmental Entomology, 36: 707–712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boggs, C.L. 1986. Reproductive strategies of female butterflies: variation in and constraints on fecundity. Ecological Entomology, 11: 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, A.L. 1999. Physiological adaptation to temporal variation in conifer foliage by a caterpillar. The Canadian Entomologist, 131: 659–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, W.J. 1956. History of the hemlock looper, Lambdina fiscellaria fiscellaria (Guen.), (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) in Newfoundland, and note on its biology. The Canadian Entomologist, 87: 587–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Gryse, J.J., and Schedl, K. 1934. An account of the eastern hemlock looper, Ellopia fiscellaria Gn., on hemlock, with notes on allied species. Scientific Agriculture, 14: 523–539.Google Scholar
Delisle, J., and Hardy, M. 1997. Male larval nutrition influences the reproductive success of both sexes of the spruce budworm Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Functional Ecology, 11: 451–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, C.W., and Czesak, M.E. 2000. Evolutionary ecology of progeny size in arthropods. Annual Review of Entomology, 45: 341–369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hébert, C., and Jobin, L. 2001. The hemlock looper. Information Leaflet LFC-4 (revised version), Laurentian Forestry Centre, Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, Sainte-Foy, Quebec.Google Scholar
Hébert, C., Jobin, L., Berthiaume, R., Coulombe, C., and Dupont, A. 2001. Changes in hemlock looper (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) pupal distribution through a 3-year outbreak cycle. Phytoprotection, 82: 57–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hébert, C., Jobin, L., Auger, M., and Dupont, A. 2003. Oviposition traps to survey eggs of Lambdina fiscellaria (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 96: 768–776.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hébert, C., Jobin, L., Berthiaume, R., Mouton, J.F., Dupont, A., and Bordeleau, C. 2004. A new standard pupation shelter for sampling pupae and estimating mortality of the hemlock looper (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). The Canadian Entomologist, 136: 879–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hébert, C., Berthiaume, R., Bauce, É., and Brodeur, J. 2006. Geographic biotype and host-associated local adaptation in a polyphagous species, Lambdina fiscellaria (Lepidoptera: Geometridae), feeding on balsam fir on Anticosti Island. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 96: 619–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacLean, D.A., and Ebert, P. 1999. The impact of the hemlock looper (Lambdina fiscellaria fiscellaria (Guen.)) on balsam fir and spruce in New Brunswick, Canada. Forest Ecology and Management, 120: 77–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martineau, R. 1984. Insects harmful to forest trees. Canadian Forest Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
Ostaff, D.P., Borden, J.H., and Shepherd, R.F. 1974. Reproductive biology of Lambdina fiscellaria lugubrosa (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). The Canadian Entomologist, 106: 659–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otvos, I.S., and Bryant, D.G. 1972. An extraction method for rapid sampling of eastern hemlock looper eggs, Lambdina fiscellaria fiscellaria (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). The Canadian Entomologist, 104: 1511–1514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otvos, I.S., Clarke, L.J., and Durling, D.S. 1979. A history of recorded eastern hemlock looper outbreaks in Newfoundland. Information Report N-X-179, Newfoundland Forestry Research Centre, Canadian Forest Service, Environment Canada, St. John's, Newfoundland.Google Scholar
Outram, I. 1971. Aspects of mating in the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). The Canadian Entomologist, 103: 1121–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papaj, D.R. 2000. Ovarian dynamics and host use. Annual Review of Entomology, 45: 423–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parry, D., Goyer, R.A., and Lenhard, G.J. 2001. Macrogeographic clines in fecundity, reproductive allocation, and offspring size of the forest tent caterpillar Malacosoma disstria. Ecological Entomology, 26: 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruohomäki, K., Hanhimäki, S., and Haukioja, E. 1993. Effects of egg size, laying order and larval density on performance of Epirrita autumnata (Lep., Geometridae). Oikos, 68: 61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. 1999. SAS/STAT® user's guide. Version 8. Vols. 1–3. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Watson, E.B. 1934. An account of the eastern hemlock looper, Ellopia fiscellaria Gn., on balsam fir. Scientific Agriculture, 14: 669–678.Google Scholar
Wiklund, C., and Persson, A. 1983. Fecundity, and the relation of egg weight variation to offspring fitness in the speckled wood butterfly Pararge aegeria, or why don't butterfly females lay more eggs? Oikos, 40: 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, X., and Linit, M.J. 1998. Comparison of oviposition and longevity of Monochamus alternatus and M. carolinensis (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) under laboratory conditions. Environmental Entomology, 27: 885–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar