Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T08:42:56.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prevalence and biology of Furia gastropachae (Zygomycetes: Entomophthorales) in populations of forest tent caterpillar (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Melanie J. Filotas ,
Ann E. Hajek  and
Richard A. Humber
Melanie J. Filotas*
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853-0901, United States of America
Ann E. Hajek
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853-0901, United States of America
Richard A. Humber
Affiliation:
USDA–ARS Plant Protection Research Unit, United States Plant, Soil and Nutrition Laboratory, Tower Road, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853-2901, United States of America
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Furia gastropachaecomb. nov. (= Furia crustosa MacLeod et Tyrrell) has long been associated with declines in populations of the forest tent caterpillar, Malacosoma disstria Hübner; however, its prevalence and impact on host populations have never been documented. We clarify the nomenclature for this species, which has previously been called F. crustosa, and describe the morphology of F. gastropachae isolates from Maryland and New York. Epizootics of F. gastropachae were studied in M. disstria populations in New York and Maryland, United States of America. Prevalence (mean ± SE) of F. gastropachae in late fifth instar larvae in New York was 25.6 ± 7.8% compared with 22.2 ± 11.3% infection by virus and 23.3 ± 8.4% parasitism. In Maryland, F. gastropachae was not found in early instars and its incidence in fourth and fifth instars was 14.5 ± 7.3 and 21.6 ± 17.6%, respectively. Dipteran parasitoids were also important natural enemies with 38.3 ± 3.0 and 17.9 ± 1.4% parasitism in fourth and fifth instars, respectively. Virus was found in fewer than 5% of larvae collected. Furia gastropachae showed a marked tendency toward resting spore production in infected larvae, with 100% of larvae collected in New York and >80% of larvae collected in Maryland producing resting spores, either alone or in combination with conidia. The appearance of cadavers of larvae dying from fungal and viral infections was similar. Of 13 species of Lepidoptera exposed to F. gastropachae conidia in host-range bioassays, only 3.3% of Danaus plexippus (L.) (Lepidoptera: Danaidae), 5.6% of Pieris rapae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae), and 3.7% of Manduca sexta (L.) (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae) were successfully infected by this fungus.

Résumé

Furia gastropachaecomb. nov. (= Furia crustosa MacLeod et Tyrrell) a depuis longtemps été associé à une diminution des populations de Malacosoma disstria Hübner, la livrée des forêts. Cependant, la fréquence d'infection et son impact sur les populations hôtes n'ont jamais été documentés. Nous clarifions la nomenclature de cette espèce, qui a été appelée antérieurement F. crustosa, et décrivons la morphologie des isolats de F. gastropachae en provenance du Maryland et de New York. Des épizooties de F. gastropachae ont été étudiées dans des populations de M. disstria de l'état de New York et du Maryland (États-Unis d'Amérique). La prévalence de F. gastropachae chez les larves de la fin du cinquième stade larvaire dans New York était de 25,6 ± 7,8 % (moyenne ± écart type). Par comparaison, le taux d'infection par le virus et le taux de parasitisme étaient, respectivement, de 22,2 ± 11,3 et 23,3 ± 8,4 %. Dans l'état du Maryland, nous n'avons pas observé F. gastropachae dans les premiers stades larvaires et son incidence chez les larves des quatrième et cinquième stade étaient de 14,5 ± 7,3 et de 21,6 ± 17,6 % respectivement. Les parasitoïdes de l'ordre des diptères représentaient également d'importants ennemis naturels de ces deux derniers stades larvaires (38,3 ± 3,0 et 17,9 ± 1,4 % de parasitisme, respectivement). Le virus était présent dans moins de 5 % des larves recueillies. Furia gastropachae a démontré une tendance marquée à produire des spores de réserve chez les larves infectées: 100 % des larves recueillies dans l'état de New York et >80 % des larves recueillies dans l'état du Maryland comprenaient des spores de réserve, soit seules, soit en association avec des conidies. L'apparence des cadavres des larves tuées par des infections fongiques ou par des infections virales était semblable. Des 13 espèces de lépidoptères exposés à des conidies durant les bio-essais sur l'éventail des hôtes de F. gastropachae, seulement 3,3 % de Danaus plexippus (L.) (Lepidoptera: Danaidae), 5,6 % de Pieris rapae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) et 3,7 % de Manduca sexta (L.) (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae) ont pu être infectés par ce champignon.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 135 , Issue 3 , June 2003 , pp. 359 - 378
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2003

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

Abbott, W.S. 1925. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. Journal of Economic Entomology 18: 265–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrahamson, L.P., Harper, J.D. 1973. Microbial insecticides control forest tent caterpillar in southwestern Alabama. United States Forest Service Southern Forest Experiment Station Research Note SO–157Google Scholar
Addy, N.D. 1969. Rearing the forest tent caterpillar on an artificial diet. Journal of Economic Entomology 62: 270–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baird, A.B. 1917. An historical account of the forest tent caterpillar and of the fall webworm in North America. Report of the Entomological Society of Ontario 47: 73–87Google Scholar
Balazy, S. 1993. Fungi (Mycota). Entomophthorales. Volume 24. Warsaw: Polish Academy of Sciences, W Szafer Institute of BotanyGoogle Scholar
Batko, A. 1966. On the subgenera of the fungus genus Zoophthora Batko 1964 (Entomophthoraceae). Acta Mycologica 2: 15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, F.T. 1971. Malacosoma disstria Hübner, forest tent caterpillar (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae). pp 144–7 in RM Prentice, PS Corbet (Eds), Biological control programmes in Canada, 1959–1968. Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control Technical Communication 4Google Scholar
Brown, A.W.A. 1938. Forest tent caterpillar in Ontario in 1931–1938. Report of the Entomological Society of Ontario 69: 37–42Google Scholar
Cameron, M.J.W. 1967. Suitability of pathogens for biological control. pp 182–96 in van derLaan, P.A. (Ed), Insect Pathology and Microbial Control, Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Insect Pathology and Microbial Control, Wageningen, the Netherlands, 5–10 September 1966. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing CoGoogle Scholar
Canadian Forestry Service. 1986. Forest insect and disease conditions in Canada 1985. Ottawa: Canadian Forestry ServiceGoogle Scholar
Canadian Forestry Service. 1987. Forest insect and disease conditions in Canada 1986. Ottawa: Canadian Forestry ServiceGoogle Scholar
Carruthers, R.I., Soper, R.S. 1987. Fungal diseases. pp 357–416in Fuxa, J.R., Tanada, Y. (Eds), Epizootiology of insect diseases. New York: John Wiley and SonsGoogle Scholar
Chapman, J.W., Glaser, R.W. 1915. A preliminary list of insects which have wilt, with a comparative study of their polyhedra. Journal of Economic Entomology 8: 140–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cytel Software Corp. 1998. StatXact 4 for Windows. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cytel Software CorpGoogle Scholar
Fitzgerald, T.D. 1995. The tent caterpillars. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University PressGoogle Scholar
Frye, R.D., Ramse, D.A. 1975. Natural control agents in forest tent caterpillar populations. North Dakota Farm Research 32: 14–9Google Scholar
Hajek, A.E. 1997 a. Entomophaga maimaiga reproductive output is determined by the spore type initiating an infection. Mycological Research 101: 971–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajek, A.E. 1997 b. Fungal and viral epizootics in gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) populations in central New York. Biological Control 10: 58–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajek, A.E., Roberts, D.W. 1992. Field diagnosis of gypsy moth (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) larval mortality caused by Entomophaga maimaiga to North American gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar, populations. Environmental Entomology 21: 706–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajek, A.E., Shimazu, M., Knoblauch, B. 2000. Isolating a species of Entomophthorales using resting sporebearing soil. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 75: 298–300CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hildahl, V., Campbell, A.E. 1975. Forest tent caterpillar in the prairie provinces. Canadian Forest Service Northern Forest Research Centre Information Report NOR–X–135Google Scholar
Humber, R.A. 1989. Synopsis of a revised classification for the Entomophthorales (Zygomycotina). Mycotaxon 34: 441–60Google Scholar
Humber, R.A., Ben-Ze'ev, I. 1981. Erynia (Zygomycetes: Entomophthorales): emendation, synonymy, and transfers. Mycotaxon 13: 506–16Google Scholar
MacLeod, D.M. 1956. Notes on the genus Empusa Cohn. Canadian Journal of Botany 34: 16–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacLeod, D.M., Tyrrell, D. 1979. Entomophthora crustosa n. sp. as a pathogen of the forest tent caterpillar, Malacosoma disstria (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae). The Canadian Entomologist 111: 1137–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, O.N. 1983. Microorganisms isolated from forest insects of British Colombia. Journal of the Entomological Society of British Columbia 80: 29–36Google Scholar
Myers, J.H. 1993. Population outbreaks in forest Lepidoptera. American Scientist 81: 240–51Google Scholar
Niell, M., Santamaria, S. 2001. Additions to the knowledge of entomopathogenic Entomophthorales (Fungi, Zygomycota) from Spain. Nova Hedwigia 73: 167–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papierok, B., Hajek, A.E. 1997. Fungi: Entomophthorales. pp 187–212in Lacey, L. (Ed), Manual of techniques in insect pathology. San Diego: Academic PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkins, G.H. 1900. The forest tent caterpillar (Clisiocampa [Malacosoma] disstria). Vermont Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 76: 113–37Google Scholar
Raciborski, M. 1910. Mycotheca polonica. Kosmos (LWOW, Warszawa) 35: 768–81Google Scholar
Samson, R.A., Nigg, H.N. 1992. Furia crustosa, fungal pathogen of forest tent caterpillar in Florida. Florida Entomologist 75: 280–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. 2001. SAS software release 8.2. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute IncGoogle Scholar
Smirnoff, W.A. 1968. Microorganisms isolated from Malacosoma americanum and Malacosoma disstria in the province of Quebec. Canadian Forest Service Bimonthly Research Notes 24: 4Google Scholar
Smith, J.D., Goyer, R.A. 1986. Population fluctuations and causes of mortality for the forest tent caterpillar, Malacosoma disstria (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae), on three different sites in southern Louisiana. Environmental Entomology 15: 1184–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stairs, G.R. 1972. Pathogenic microorganisms in the regulation of forest insect populations. Annual Review of Entomology 17: 355–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinhaus, E.A., Marsh, G.A. 1962. Report of diagnoses of diseased insects, 1951–1961. Hilgardia 33: 349–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyrrell, D., Ben-Ze'ev, I.S. 1990. An emended description of Furia crustosa (Entomophthorales: Entomophthoraceae). Mycotaxon 37: 211–5Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 1997. Forest insect and disease conditions in the United States 1996. Washington, District of Columbia: United States Department of Agriculture Forest ServiceGoogle Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 1998. Forest insect and disease conditions in the United States 1997. Washington, District of Columbia: United States Department of Agriculture Forest ServiceGoogle Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 1999. Forest insect and disease conditions in the United States 1998. Washington, District of Columbia: United States Department of Agriculture Forest ServiceGoogle Scholar
Welton, M. 1991. Fungal pathogens — forest tent caterpillar and gypsy moth. Forest Pest Management Institute Newsletter 9: 7Google Scholar
Witter, J.A. 1979. The forest tent caterpillar (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae) in Minnesota: a case history review. Great Lakes Entomologist 12: 191–7Google Scholar
Witter, J.A., Mattson, W.J., and Kulman, H.M. 1975. Numerical analysis of a forest tent caterpillar (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae) outbreak in northern Minnesota. The Canadian Entomologist 107: 837–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar