Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T10:34:16.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diel periodicity of sexual communication in Anarsia lineatella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Kristine K. Schlamp ,
Kendra Brown ,
Regine Gries ,
Melanie Hart ,
Gerhard Gries  and
Gary G.R. Judd
Kristine K. Schlamp
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Kendra Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Regine Gries
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Melanie Hart
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Gerhard Gries*
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Gary G.R. Judd
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre, 4200 Hwy 97, Summerland, British Columbia, Canada V0H 1Z0
*
1 Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The sex pheromone of the peach twig borer, Anarsia lineatella (Zeller), was identified 30 years ago but the communication biology of this species has hardly been studied. In laboratory experiments, female moths kept at a photoperiod of 16L:8D (20 ± 2 °C, 70% ± 5% relative humidity) emitted pheromone before, during, and after sunrise (0400–0600 Pacific standard time), whereas pheromone was present in pheromone glands at similar quantities throughout the 24 h recording period. These data suggest that pheromone production and emission are not closely linked. In field experiments during July 2001 near Livingston, California (CA), and during June 2002 near Keremeos, British Columbia (BC), males were attracted to traps baited with synthetic sex pheromone (CA) or conspecific females (BC) only between 0300 and 0600 (Pacific standard time), suggesting overlap between periods of pheromone emission by females and attraction response by males. Groups of females in the presence of conspecific males, which were physically separated from females, emitted less sex pheromone than groups of females in the absence of males, suggesting that males communicate their presence to females and females change their behaviour in response.

Résumé

La phéromone sexuelle de la mineuse du pêcher, Anarsia lineatella (Zeller), est connue depuis 30 ans, mais la biologie de la communication chez cette espèce a été à peine étudiée. Dans des expériences de laboratoire, des papillons femelles gardés à une photopériode de 16L:8O (20 ± 2 °C, 70 % ± 5 % d'humidité relative) émettent la phéromone avant, pendant et après l'aube (0400–0600; heure normale du Pacifique), alors que des quantités semblables de phéromone se retrouvent dans les glandes à phéromone tout au cours de la période d'enregistrement de 24 h. Ces données laissent croire que la production et la libération de la phéromone ne sont pas intimement reliées. Lors d'expériences de terrain en juillet 2001 près de Livingston, Californie (CA) et en juin 2002 près de Keremeos, Colombie-Britannique (BC), les mâles étaient attirés par les pièges appâtés de phéromone sexuelle synthétique (CA) ou de femelles de même espèce (BC) seulement entre 0300 et 0600 (heure normale du Pacifique), ce qui indique un chevauchement entre la période d'émission de la phéromone par les femelles et la période de réaction d'attraction des mâles. Des groupes de femelles en présence de mâles de leur espèce, mais physiquement séparés d'eux, émettent moins de phéromone sexuelle que les femelles en l'absence de mâles, ce qui indique que les mâles signalent leur présence aux femelles et que celles-ci changent leur comportement.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 138 , Issue 3 , June 2006 , pp. 384 - 389
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2006

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

Delisle, J., and Royer, L. 1994. Changes in pheromone titer of oblique-banded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana, virgin females as a function of time of day, age, and temperature. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 20: 45–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
del Mazo-Cancino, A., Malo, E.A., Cruz-Lopez, L., and Rojas, J.C. 2004. Diel periodicity and influence of age and mating on female sex pheromone titre in Estigmene acrea (Lep., Arctiidae). Journal of Applied Entomology, 128: 459–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gemeno, C., and Haynes, K.F. 2001. Impact of photoperiod on the sexual behaviour of the black cutworm moth (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Environmental Entomology, 30: 189–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, T.G., Slessor, K.N., Shepherd, R.F., Grant, G.G., and Manville, J.F. 1984. European pine shoot moth, Rhyacionia buolina (Lepidoptera: Torticidae): identification of additional pheromone components resulting in an improved lure. The Canadian Entomologist, 116: 1525–1532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griepink, F. C., Drijfhout, F.P., Van Beek, T.A., Visser, J.H., and De Groot, A. 2000. Analysis of sex pheromone gland content of individual Symmetrischema tangolias by means of direct gland introduction into a two-dimensional gas chromatograph. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 26: 1013–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, G., Schaefer, P.W., Gries, R., Liška, J., and Gotoh, T. 2001. Reproductive character displacement in Lymantria monacha from northern Japan? Journal of Chemical Ecology, 27: 1163–1176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guibiao, H., Runyan, M., Jiawei, D., Cui, H., and Lianchang, L. 1999. The sex pheromone communication system of adult jujube leafroller Ancylis sativa Liu. Acta Entomologica Sinica, 42: 25–30.Google Scholar
Hart, M. 2006. The role of sonic signals in the sexual communication of peach twig borers, Anarsia lineatella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). M.Sc. thesis, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia.Google Scholar
Haynes, K.F., and Birch, M.C. 1984. The periodicity of pheromone release and male responsiveness in the artichoke plume moth Platyptilia carduidactyla. Physiological Entomology, 9: 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes, K.F., and Birch, M.C. 1986. Temporal reproductive isolation between two species of plume moths (Lepidoptera: Pterophoridae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 79: 210–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin-Tong, Z., and Xian-Zuo, M. 2001. Sexual behavior of Holcocerus insularis and circadian rhythm of its sex pheromone production and release. Acta Entomologica Sinica, 44: 428–432.Google Scholar
Jutsum, A.R., and Gordon, R.F. (Editors). 1989. Pheromones: importance to insects and role in pest management. In Insect pheromones in plant protection. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Surrey, Great Britain. pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Kamimura, M., and Tatsuki, S. 1993. Diel rhythms of calling behavior and pheromone production of oriental tobacco budworm moth, Helicoverpa assulta (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). Journal of Chemical Ecology, 12: 2953–2963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McElfresh, J.S., and Millar, J.G. 1993. Establishment and rearing of Anarsia lineatella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) on a meridic diet. Journal of Economic Entomology, 85: 1399–1404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeil, J.N. 1991. Behavioral ecology of pheromone-mediated communication in moths and its importance in the use of pheromone traps. Annual Review of Entomology, 36: 407–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, J.G., and Rice, R.E. 1992. Reexamination of the female sex pheromone of the peach twig borer: field screening of minor constituents of pheromone gland extracts and of pheromone analogs. Journal of Economic Entomology, 85: 1709–1716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roelofs, W., Kochansky, J., Anthon, E., Rice, R., and Cardé, R. 1975. Sex pheromone of the peach twig borer moth (Anarsia lineatella). Environmental Entomology, 4: 580–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaerila, Y., Gries, G., Gries, R., and Boo, T.C. 2000. Specificity of communication channels in four limacodid moths: Darna bradleyi, Darnatrima, Setothosea asigna, and Setora nitens (Lepidoptera: Limacodidae). Chemoecology, 10: 193–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlyter, F. 1992. Sampling range, attraction range, and effective attraction radius — estimates of trap efficiency and communication distance in coleopteran pheromone and host attraction systems. Journal of Applied Entomology, 114: 439–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidney, M. 2005. Tree-derived stimuli affecting hostselection response by larva and adult peach twig borers, Anarsia lineatella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). M.Sc. thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia.Google Scholar
Toshova, T.B., and Subchev, M.A. 2003. Sex pheromone communication in Theresimima ampellophaga Bayle-Barelle (Lepidoptera: Zygaenidae): female calling behaviour and male electroantennographic response to synthetic pheromone compounds. Acta Zoology Bulgaria, 55: 43–51.Google Scholar
Valles, S.M., Heath, R.R., and Capinera, J.L. 1992. Production and release of sex pheromone by Diaphania nitidalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): periodicity, age, and density effects. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 85: 731–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, M., and Baker, T.C. 1984. Effects of intermittent and continuous pheromone stimulation on the flight behaviour of the oriental fruit moth, Grapholita molesta. Physiological Entomology, 9: 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, J., and Meng, X. 2001 Sexual behavior of Holcocerus insularis and circadian rhythm of its sex pheromone production and release. Acta Entomologica Sinica, 44: 428–432.Google Scholar