No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A SIMPLE CHARACTER FOR RECOGNIZING SECOND AND THIRD INSTAR LARVAE OF FIVE CANADIAN MOSQUITO GENERA (DIPTERA: CULICIDAE)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 May 2012
Abstract
Second and third instar mosquito larvae of 34 Canadian species belonging to the genera Anopheles, Aedes, Culex, Culiseta, and Wyeomyia may be reliably and simply separated by the absence or presence of the thoracic setae, 8-M and 7-T, and even more so by the number of the metathoracic setal support plates. As the 7-T seta is always inserted on a plate, a larva in the third stage will bear one more plate than in the second stage. In the species studied, the number of metathoracic plates is constant for a given genus at a given instar. Thus an intermediate instar larva, once identified to genus, can be assigned to second or third instar fairly readily by counting the number of setal plates on one side of the metathorax.
Résumé
L’absence ou la présence des soies thoraciques, 8-M et 7-T, permet de différencier sans difficulté les deuxième et troisième stades larvaires de 34 espèces canadiennes de moustiques représentant les genres Anopheles, Aedes, Culex, Culiseta et Wyeomyia. Les plaques sclérotisées à la base des soies permettent de les distinguer encore plus facilement. La soie 7-T s’insérant toujours sur une plaque sclérotisée, une larve de troisième stade portera toujours de chaque côté du métathorax une plaque de plus qu’au stade précédent. Chez les espèces étudiées, le nombre de plaques est fixé pour un genre donné à un stade donné de sorte qu’une larve identifée au genre peut immédiatement être classée selon son stade par le nombre de plaques situées de chaque côté du métathorax.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1981
References
Belkin, J. N. and McDonald, W. A.. 1956. A population of Uranotaenia anhydor from Death Valley, with descriptions of all stages and discussion of the complex (Diptera, Culicidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 49: 105–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohart, R. M. and Washino, R. K.. 1957. Differentiation of second and third stage larvae of California Culex (Diptera: Culicidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 50: 459–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danks, H. V. and Corbet, P. S.. 1973. A key to all stages of Aedes nigripes and A. impiger (Diptera: Culicidae) with a description of first-instar larvae and pupae. Can. Ent. 105: 367–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Oliveira, D. and Durand, M.. 1978. Head capsule growth in Culex territans Walker. Mosquito News 38: 230–233.Google Scholar
Dodge, H. R. 1963. Studies on mosquito larvae. I. Later instars of eastern North American species. Can. Ent. 95: 796–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodge, H. R. 1964. Larval chaetotaxy and notes on the biology of Toxorhynchites rutilus septentrionalis (Diptera: Culicidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 57: 46–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodge, H. R. 1966. Studies on mosquito larvae. II. The first-stage larvae of North American Culicidae and of world Anophelinae. Can. Ent. 98: 337–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eddleman, C. D. 1967. Morphological and biometrical differentiation of the larval instars of mosquitoes. I. Culex territans. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60: 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eddleman, C. D. 1968. Morphological and biometrical differentiation of the larval instars of mosquitoes. II. Orthopodomyia alba and O. signifera. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 61: 1372–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, B. A. and Rattanarithikul, R.. 1973. Comparative morphology of early larval instars of Aedes aegypti and A. seatoi in Thailand. Mosquito Syst. 5: 280–293.Google Scholar
Hurlbut, H. S. 1938. A study of the larval chaetotaxy of Anopheles walkeri Theobald. Am. J. Hyg. 28: 149–173.Google Scholar
Knight, K. L. 1964. Differentiation of the larval instars of Aedes sollicitans (Walker) and A. taenior-hynchus (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Culicidae). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 66: 160–166.Google Scholar
Knight, K. L. and Laffoon, J. L.. 1971. A mosquito taxonomic glossary. VIII. The larval chaetotaxy. Mosquito Syst. Newslett. 3: 160–194.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, D. W. 1972. The thoracic chaetotaxy of the last three larval instars of four New England species of Aedes (Diptera: Culicidae). Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of Massachusetts. 59 pp.Google Scholar
Makiya, K. 1969. Head width of mosquito larvae for instar determination. Jap. J. san. Zool. 20: 185–195. (In Japanese, English summary.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reisen, W. K. and Siddiqui, T. F.. 1979. Horizontal and vertical estimates of immature survivorship for Culex tritaeniorhynchus (Diptera: Culicidae) in Pakistan. J. med. Ent. 16: 207–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, M. E. 1969 a. The Aedes mosquitoes of New England (Diptera: Culicidae). II. Larvae: keys to instars, and to species exclusive of first instar. Can. Ent. 101: 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M. E. 1969 b. The Aedes mosquitoes of New England. III. Saddle hair position in 2nd and 3rd instar larvae, with particular reference to instar recognition and species relationships. Mosquito Syst. Newslett. 1: 57–62.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M. and Brust, R. A.. 1971. Photoperiodic control of the maintenance and termination of larval diapause in Wyeomyia smithii (Coq.) (Diptera: Culicidae) with notes on oogenesis in the adult female. Can. J. Zool. 49: 1065–1073.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, D. M., Dang, P. T., and Ellis, R. A.. 1979. The insects and arachnids of Canada. Part 6. The mosquitoes of Canada (Diptera: Culicidae). Can. Dep. Agric. Publ. 1686. 390 pp.Google Scholar
Yan, S.-L. 1977. External structures of all larval instars of five common Culex species in Taiwan. Chinese J. Microbiol. 10: 80–86.Google ScholarPubMed