Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T10:29:34.884Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LABORATORY CROSSINGS WITH DIFFERENT SOURCES OF THE LARCH CASEBEARER PARASITE CHRYSOCHARIS LARICINELLAE (HYMENOPTERA: EULOPHIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

R.B. Ryan  and
C. M. Yoshimoto
R.B. Ryan
Affiliation:
Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, FS-USDA, Corvallis, Oregon
C. M. Yoshimoto
Affiliation:
Canadian Forestry Service, Department of the Environment, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Chrysocharis laricinellae (Ratz.) from Austria, Sweden, England, and Wisconsin, some of which were thought possibly different species, were crossed. Hybrid sex ratios in this arrhenotokous species were similar to parental types, indicating conspecificity. English and Wisconsin strains tended toward darker legs and female scapes.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 107 , Issue 12 , December 1975 , pp. 1301 - 1304
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1975

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

DeBach, P. 1969. Uniparental, sibling and semi-species in relation to biological control. Israel J. Ent. 4: 11–28.Google Scholar
Dowden, P. B. and Berry, P. A.. 1938. European parasites of Rhyacionia buoliana (Schiff.), Coleophora laricella (Hbn.) and Phyllotoma nemorata (Fall.). J. econ. Ent. 31: 459–460.Google Scholar
Eidmann, H. H. 1965. Ökologische und physiologische Studien über die Lärchenminiermotte, Coleophora laricella Hbn. Studia For. Suecica, No. 32. 222 pp.Google Scholar
Graham, A. R. 1944. The establishment of some imported parasites of the larch casebearer, Haploptilia laricella Hbn., in Ontario. 74th Rep. ent. Soc. Ont. (1943): 48–52.Google Scholar
Jagsch, A. 1973. Populationsdynamik und Parasitenkomplex der Lärchenminiermotte, Coleophora laricella Hbn., im natürlichen Verbreitungsgebiet der Europäischen Lärche, Larix decidua Mill. Z. angew. Ent. 73: 1–42.Google Scholar
Kelleher, J. S. 1969. Introduction practices—past and present. Bull. ent. Soc. Am. 15(3): 235–236.Google Scholar
Messenger, P. S. and van den Bosch, R.. 1971. The adaptability of introduced biological control agents. In Huffaker, C. B. (Ed.), Biological control, pp. 68–92. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
Quednau, F. W. 1970. Competition and co-operation between Chrysocharis laricinellae and Agathis pumila on larch casebearer in Quebec. Can. Ent. 102: 602–612.Google Scholar
Rosen, D. and DeBach, P.. 1973. Systematics, morphology and biological control. Entomophaga 18(3): 215–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, R. B. and Denton, R. E.. 1973. Initial releases of Chrysocharis laricinellae and Dicladocerus westwoodi for biological control of the larch casebearer in the western United States. Pacif. Nthwest. For. Range Exp. Stn USDA For. Serv. Res. Note PNW-200. 4 pp.Google Scholar
Scheffé, H. 1959. The analysis of variance. Wiley, New York. 477 pp.Google Scholar
Yoshimoto, C. 1973. Review of North American Chrysocharis (Kratochviliana) (Eulophidae: Chalcidoidea) north of Mexico, especially species attacking birch casebearer (Lepidoptera: Coleophoridae) and birch leafminer (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae). Can. Ent. 105: 1309–1349.Google Scholar