Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T08:14:55.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review of the species of Trichomalus (Chalcidoidea: Pteromalidae) associated with Ceutorhynchus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) host species of European origin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Franck J. Muller ,
Hannes Baur ,
Gary A.P. Gibson ,
Peter G. Mason  and
Ulrich Kuhlmann
Franck J. Muller
Affiliation:
CABI Europe—Switzerland, Rue des Grillons 1, 2800 Delémont, Switzerland
Hannes Baur
Affiliation:
Department of Invertebrates, Natural History Museum, Bernastrasse 15, CH-3005 Bern, Switzerland
Gary A.P. Gibson
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Biodiversity and Integrated Pest Management, Research Centre, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Canada
Peter G. Mason
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Biodiversity and Integrated Pest Management, Research Centre, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Canada
Ulrich Kuhlmann*
Affiliation:
CABI Europe—Switzerland, Rue des Grillons 1, 2800 Delémont, Switzerland
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Six species of Trichomalus Thomson were reared as parasitoids of Ceutorhynchinae hosts in Europe during surveys in 2000–2004. Trichomalus rusticus (Walker) is treated as a valid species, resurrected from synonymy under T. lucidus (Walker), and T. lyttus (Walker) is transferred from synonymy under T. lucidus and newly placed in synonymy with T. rusticus. Illustrated keys to females and males are given to differentiate the six species (T. bracteatus (Walker), T. campestris (Walker), T. gynetelus (Walker), T. lucidus, T. perfectus (Walker), and T. rusticus) except for males of T. bracteatus and T. gynetelus. A lectotype female is designated for T. rusticus. Trichomalus campestris is newly recorded as a parasitoid of Ceutorhynchus cardariae Korotyaev. Implications of the host-parasitoid associations recovered by the surveys are discussed relative to introduction of species to North America for classical biological control.

Résumé

Six espèces de Trichomalus Thomson ont été élevées en tant que parasitoïdes de Ceutorhynchinae en Europe lors de périodes d'échantillonnage entre 2000 et 2004. Trichomalus rusticus (Walker) est traité comme espèce valide et non plus comme synonyme de T. lucidus (Walker), et T. lyttus (Walker) est transféré de sa synonymie avec T. lucidus et nouvellement placé en tant que synonyme de T. rusticus. Une clé illustrée est fournie afin de différencier les mâles et les femelles des six espèces (T. bracteatus (Walker), T. campestris (Walker), T. gynetelus (Walker), T. lucidus, T. perfectus (Walker) et T. rusticus) à l'exception des mâles de T. bracteatus et T. gynetelus. Un lectotype femelle est décrit pour T. rusticus. Trichomalus campestris est trouvé pour la première fois parasitant Ceutorhynchus cardariae Korotyaev. Les associations hôte-parasitoïdes déterminées lors des échantillonnages sont discutées, et en particulier ce que ces résultats impliquent pour l'introduction d'espèces en Amérique du Nord en tant qu'auxiliaires de lutte biologique.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 139 , Issue 5 , October 2007 , pp. 643 - 657
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2007

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

Babendreier, D., Bigler, F., and Kuhlmann, U. 2005. Methods used to assess non-target effects of invertebrate biological control agents of arthropod pests. BioControl, 50: 821–870.Google Scholar
Blossey, B., Nuzzo, V.A., Hinz, H.L., and Gerber, E. 2002. Garlic mustard. In Biological control of invasive plants in the eastern United States. Edited by Driesche, R. Van, Lyon, S., Blossey, B., Hoddle, M., and Reardon, R.. USDA Forest Health Technology Transfer Team, Morgantown, West Virginia. pp. 365–372.Google Scholar
Brodeur, J., Leclerc, L., Fournier, M., and Roy, M. 2001. The cabbage seedpod weevil, Ceutorhynchus obstrictus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): a new pest of canola in northeastern North America. The Canadian Entomologist, 133: 709–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cárcamo, H.A., Dosdall, L.M., Dolinski, M., Olfert, O., and Byers, J.R. 2001. The cabbage seedpod weevil, Ceutorhynchus obstrictus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) — a review. Journal of the Entomological Society of British Columbia, 98: 201–210.Google Scholar
Colonnelli, E. 2004. Catalogue of Ceutorhynchinae of the world, with key to genera. Argania edito, Balmes, Barcelona.Google Scholar
Dalla Torre, K.W. von. 1898. Catalogus Hymenopterorum hucusque descriptorum systematicus et synonymicus. V. Chalcididae et Proctotrupidae. Leipzig, Germany.Google Scholar
Delucchi, V., and Graham, M.W.R. 1956. La révision du genre Trichomalus Thomson (1878) (Chalcidoidea: Pteromalidae). Beiträge zur Entomologie, 6: 543–576.Google Scholar
Dieckmann, L. 1972. Beiträge zur Insektenfauna der DDR : Coleoptera – Curculionidae: Ceutorhynchinae. Beiträge zur Entomologie, 22: 3–128.Google Scholar
Dosdall, L.M., Weiss, R.M., Olfert, O., and Cárcamo, H.A. 2002. Temporal and geographical distribution patterns of the cabbage seedpod weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in canola. The Canadian Entomologist, 134: 403–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Förster, A. 1841. Beiträge zur Monographie der Pteromalinen Nees. I Heft. Aachen, Germany.Google Scholar
Gerber, E., Hinz, H.L., Blossey, B., and Bacher, S. 2003. Two shoot miners as potential biological control agents for garlic mustard: should both be released? In Proceedings of the XI International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Canberra, Australia, 27 April 2003 — 2 May 2003. Edited by Cullen, J.M., Briese, D.T., Kriticos, D.J., Lonsdale, W.M., Morin, L., and Scott, J.K.. CSIRO. Canberra, Australia. pp. 108–112.Google Scholar
Gibson, G.A.P., Huber, J.T., and Woolley, J.R. 1997. Annotated keys to the genera of Nearctic Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera). NRC Research Press, Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
Gibson, G.A.P., Baur, H., Ulmer, B., Dosdall, L., and Muller, F.J. 2005. On the misidentification of the chalcid (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) parasitoids of the cabbage seedpod weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in North America. The Canadian Entomologist, 137: 381–403.Google Scholar
Goulet, H., and Huber, J.T. 1993. Hymenoptera of the world: an identification guide to families. Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
Graham, M.W.R. 1956. A revision of the Walker types of Pteromalidae (Hym., Chalcidoidea). Part 2 (including descriptions of new genera and species). Entomologist's Monthly Magazine, 92: 246–263.Google Scholar
Graham, M.W.R. 1969. The Pteromalidae of NorthWestern Europe (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Entomology, 16(Suppl.).Google Scholar
Julien, M.H., and Griffiths, M.W. 1998. Biological control of weeds — a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Klander, B. 2001. Die Rüsselkäfer der Unterfamilie Ceutorhynchinae und deren Parasitoide auf Winterraps und begleitenden Unkräutern in Schleswig-Holstein. M.Sc. thesis, Zoologisches Institut der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Kiel, Germany.Google Scholar
Kuhlmann, U., Dosdall, L.M., and Mason, P.G. 2002. Ceutorhynchus obstrictus (Marsham), cabbage seedpod weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). In Biological control programmes in Canada, 1981–2000. Edited by Mason, P.G. and Huber, J.T.. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, United Kingdom. pp. 52–58.Google Scholar
Mason, P.G., and Huber, J.T. 2002. Biological control programmes in Canada, 1981–2000. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Mason, P.G., Baute, T., Olfert, O., and Roy, M. 2004. Cabbage seedpod weevil, Ceutorhynchus obstrictus (Marsham) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in Ontario and Quebec. Journal of the Entomological Society of Ontario, 134: 107–113.Google Scholar
McLeod, J.H. 1953. Notes on the cabbage ceedpod weevil, Ceutorhynchus assimilis (Payk.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), and its parasites. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of British Columbia, 49: 11–18.Google Scholar
McLeod, J.H. 1962. Biological control of pests of crops, fruit trees, ornamentals, and weeds in Canada up to 1959. Part 1. In A review of the biological control attempts against insects and weeds in Canada. Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control Technical Communication No. 2, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Murchie, A.K., and Williams, I.H. 1998. A bibliography of the parasitoids of the cabbage seed weevil (Ceutorhynchus assimilis Payk.). International Organisation for Biological and Integrated Control of Noxious Animals and Plants, West Palaearctic Regional Section (IOBC/WPRS) Bulletin, 21: 163–169.Google Scholar
Noyes, J.S. 2006. Universal Chalcidoidea Database [online]. Available at www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/chalcidoids/index.html [accessed 20 February 2006].Google Scholar
Thomson, C.G. 1878. Hymenoptera Scandinaviae. Tom V. Pteromalus (Svederus) continuatio, Lund, Sweden.Google Scholar
Vidal, S. 2003. Identification of hymenopterous parasitoids associated with oilseed rape pests. In Biocontrol of oilseed rape pests. Edited by Alford, D.V.. Blackwell Science, Oxford, United Kingdom. pp. 61–179.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1834. Monographia Chalciditum (continued from p. 309). Entomological Magazine, 2: 340–369.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1835. Monographia Chalciditum. Entomological Magazine, 2: 476–502.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1836. Monographia Chalciditum (continued). Entomological Magazine, 3: 465–496.Google Scholar
Walker, F. 1848. List of the specimens of hymenopterous insects in the collection of the British Museum. Part 2. E. Newman, London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Williams, I.H. 2003. Parasitoids of cabbage seed weevil. In Biocontrol of oilseed rape pests. Edited by Alford, D.V.. Blackwell Science, Oxford, United Kingdom. pp. 97–112.Google Scholar