Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:05:02.201Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LABORATORY STUDIES ON DEVELOPMENT OF GYPSY MOTH, LYMANTRIA DISPAR (L.) (LEPIDOPTERA: LYMANTRIIDAE), LARVAE ON FOLIAGE OF GYMNOSPERMS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Jeffrey C. Miller  and
Paul E. Hanson
Jeffrey C. Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Oregon State University, Conallis, Oregon, USA97331
Paul E. Hanson
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Oregon State University, Conallis, Oregon, USA97331
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The development of gypsy moth larvae was monitored in the laboratory on the foliage of 39 species belonging to 18 genera in the Araucaraceae, Cupressaceae, Ginkgoaceae, Pinaceae, Taxaceae, and Taxodiaceae. Larval survival through successive molts, time of larval development, live female pupal weights, and adult female production of ova were measured as indicators of host plant suitability for the gypsy moth. The criteria for distinguishing the most suitable hosts were as follows: (1) greater than 80% survival of first-instar larvae, (2) development to pupation in less than 41 days, (3) female pupal weights over 1099 mg, and (4) the production of more than 350 ova. The most suitable species were in the Pinaceae, in particular, Cedrus deodara (Roxb. ex Lamb.) G. Don, Larix decidua Mill., and Picea pungens Engelm. The least suitable species were in the Cupressaceae, Ginkgoaceae, and Taxaceae. First-, second-, and third-instar larvae often differed in their ability to survive on new foliage compared with foliage from the previous year. Overall, first-instar larvae successfully developed into adults on 20 of the species tested but second-instar larvae developed into adults on 29 of the species tested. First- through fourth- or fifth-instar larvae failed to develop into adults on eight of the species tested.

Résumé

On a étudié le développement des larves de la spongieuse au laboratoire sur du feuillage de 39 espèces appartenant à 18 genres des Araucaraceae, Cupressaceae, Ginkgoaceae, Pinaceae, Taxaceae et Taxodiaceae. La survie larvaire aux différentes mues, la durée du développement larvaire, le poids frais des pupes femelles et la production des oeufs, ont été mesurés comme indicateurs de la convenance de la plante pour la spongieuse. Les critères qui distinguent les hôtes les plus convenables étaient (1) une survie de 80% du premier stade larvaire, (2) moins de 41 jours de développement jusqu’à la pupaison, (3) le poids des pupes femelles excédant 1099 mg, et (4) la production de plus de 350 oeufs. Les espèces les plus convenables étaient des Pinaceae, en particulier Cedrus deodara (Roxb. ex Lamb.) G. Don, Larix decidua Mill., et Picea pungens Engelm. Les espèces les moins convenables étaient des Cupressaceae, Ginkgoaceae, et Taxaceae. Les larves des premier, deuxième et troisième stades ont souvent montré différents niveaux de survie sur le feuillage nouveau, comparé au feuillage de l’année précédente. Globalement, les larves de premier stade se sont développées avec succès en adultes sur 20 des espèces testées, mais celles de deuxième stade ont produit des adultes sur 29 des espèces testées. Les larves des premier au quatrième ou au cinquième stade n’ont pas atteint le stade adulte sur huit des espèces testées.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 121 , Issue 6 , June 1989 , pp. 425 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1989

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

Barbosa, P. 1978. Host plant exploitation by the gypsy moth. Ent. exp. appl. 24: 28–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbosa, P., Martinat, P., and Waldvogel, M.. 1986. Development, fecundity, and survival of the herbivore Lymantria dispar and the number of plant species in its diet. Ecol. Ent. 11: 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbosa, P., Waldvogel, M., Martinat, P., and Douglass, L.W.. 1983. Developmental and reproductive performance of the gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), on selected hosts common to mid-atlantic and southern forests. Environ. Ent. 12: 1858–1862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J.G., and Fusco, R.A.. 1979. Gypsy moth larva host plant screening and evaluation. A Final Res. Rep. Calif. Dept. Food Agric. 16 pp.Google Scholar
Forbush, E.H., and Fernald, C.H.. 1896. The Gypsy Moth. Wright and Potter Print Co., Boston. 495 pp.Google Scholar
Hough, J.A., and Pimentel, D.. 1978. Influence of host foliage on development, survival, and fecundity of the gypsy moth. Environ. Ent. 7: 97–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jobin, L. 1981. Observations on the development of the gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.), on Douglas-fir and western hemlock. Res. Notes Can. For. Serv. 1(4): 29–30.Google Scholar
Kurir, A. 1953. Die Frasspflanzen des Schwammspinners (Lymantria dispar). Z. ang. Ent. 34: 543–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lechowicz, M.J., and Mauffette, Y.. 1986. Host preferences of the gypsy moth in eastern North America versus European forests. Revue d'ent. Qué. 31: 43–51.Google Scholar
Miller, J.C., Hanson, P.E., and Dowell, R.V.. 1987. The potential of gypsy moth as a pest of fruit and nut crops. Calif. Agric. 41(11,12): 10–12.Google Scholar
Mosher, F.H. 1915. Food plants of the gipsy moth in America. U.S.D.A. Bull. 250. 39 pp.Google Scholar