Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T09:31:08.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DISTRIBUTION PATTERN OF HOSTS AND PARASITIZATION BY SPALANGIA DROSOPHILAE (HYMENOPTERA: PTEROMALIDAE)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

E. F. Legner
E. F. Legner
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Control, University of California Citrus Research Center and Agricultural Experiment Station, Riverside
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Single females of Spalangia drosophilae Ashmead searching for 80 puparia of Hippelates collusor (Townsend), arranged in clumped or linear distributions, oviposited randomly producing equal numbers of progeny from cither host arrangement. Mixed groups of linear and clumped puparia caused changes in behavioral patterns that resulted in reduced progeny production, thus showing parasitization to be nonrandom. Host destruction was, nevertheless, greater in an all-clumped distribution, tile greater acceptance of clumped groups resulting in a greater number of progeny. Mixed groups involving a choice between linear or clumped distributions demonstrated the greater acceptance of clumped groups. Direct observation showed that the all-dumped distribution elicited the greatest overall initial attraction for hosts and subsequent movement to other areas. It was concluded that maximum host destruction resulted when completely random behavior was involved. A recognition of this, however, required a knowledge of behavior, host condition, and progeny production. The question of evaluating an exotic parasite’s effectiveness before introduction is discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 101 , Issue 5 , May 1969 , pp. 551 - 557
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1969

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

Bay, E. C., Legner, E. F., and Medved, R.. 1964. Hippelates collusor (Diptera: Chloropidae) as a host for four species of parasitic Hymenoptera in southern California. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 57(5): 582–584.Google Scholar
Burnett, T. 1958 a. Effect of host distribution on the reproduction of Encarsia formosa Gahan (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Can. Ent. 90(3): 179–191.Google Scholar
Burnett, T.. 1958 b. Effect of area of search on reproduction of Encarsia formosa Gahan (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Can. Ent. 90(4): 225–229.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometries 11: 1–42.Google Scholar
Legner, E. F. 1967 a. Two exotic strains of Spalangia drosophilae merit consideration in biological control of Hippelates collusor (Diptera: Chloropidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60(2): 458–462.Google Scholar
Legner, E. F.. 1967 b. Behavior changes the reproduction of Spalangia cameroni, S. endius, Muscidifurax raptor, and Nasonia vitripennis (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) at increasing fly host densities. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60(4): 819–826.Google Scholar
Smith, H. S. 1939. Insect populations in relation to biological control. Ecol. Monogr. 9: 311–320.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D., and Torrie, J. H.. 1960. Principles and procedures of statistics with special reference to the biological sciences. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Thompson, W. R. 1939. Biological control and the theories of the interactions of populations. Parasitology 31: 299–388.Google Scholar
Wylie, H. G. 1966. Some mechanisms that affect the sex ratio of Nasonia vitripennis (Walk.) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) reared from superparasitized house-fly pupae. Can. Ent. 98: 645–653.Google Scholar