Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:53:12.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DIETARY INFLUENCE ON REPRODUCTION IN BOTH SEXES OF FIVE PREDACIOUS SPECIES (NEUROPTERA)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Maurice J. Tauber  and
Catherine A. Tauber
Maurice J. Tauber
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
Catherine A. Tauber
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although the species that were closely related had similar adult feeding habits, they varied in their specific dietary requirements for mating and for the initiation of oviposition. In Chrysopa lanata, which is not predacious in the adult stage, the females required a protein-carbohydrate diet in order to mate; on the other hand, Chrysopa downesi males and females, which also are not predacious, mated when fed a diet consisting only of sugar and water. Chrysopa nigricornis males and females both required prey (Myzus persicae) before they would mate; whereas Chrysopa quadripunctata and Sympherobius amiculus, both of which are predacious as adults, did not need a diet other than sugar and water for mating.

All five species depended on prey or a synthetic protein-carbohydrate diet for sustained oviposition; however, S. amiculus initiated oviposition when fed only sugar. When the synthetic protein-carbohydrate diet was substituted for prey, 40% of the C. quadripunctata females began to oviposit. The same diet did not promote oviposition in the predacious C. nigricornis adults.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 106 , Issue 9 , September 1974 , pp. 921 - 925
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1974

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

Carlson, R. E. and Chiang, H. C.. 1973. Reduction of an Ostrinia nubilalis population by predatory insects attracted by sucrose sprays. Entomophaga 18: 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeBach, P. (Ed.) 1964. Biological control of insect pests and weeds. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
Engelmann, F. 1970. The physiology of insect reproduction. Pergamon Press, New York.Google Scholar
Gingrich, R. E. 1972. Nutritional studies: their bearing on the development of practical oligidic diets for mass rearing larvae of the screw-worm, Cochliomyia hominivorax, pp. 257–268. In Rodriguez, J. G. (Ed.), Insect and mite nutrition. North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Hagen, K. S., Sawall, E. F., and Tassan, R. L.. 1971. The use of food sprays to increase effectiveness of entomophagous insects. In Proc. Tall Timbers Conf. on Ecol. Anim. Control, No. 2, pp. 59–81.Google Scholar
Hagen, K. S. and Tassan, R. L.. 1970. The influence of food wheast® and related Saccharomyces fragilis yeast products on the fecundity of Chrysopa carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Can. Ent. 102: 806–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagen, K. S., Tassan, R. L., and Sawall, E. F. Jr., 1970. Some ecophysiological relationships between certain Chrysopa, honeydews and yeasts. Boll. Lab. Ent. agr. Filippo Silvestri Port. 28: 113–134.Google Scholar
Hodek, I., Hagen, K. S., and van Emden, H. F.. 1972. Methods for studying effectiveness of natural enemies, pp. 147–188. In van Emden, H. F. (Ed.), Aphid technology. Academic Press, London and New York.Google Scholar
Mayr, E., Linsley, E. G., and Usinger, R. L.. 1953. Methods and principles of systematic zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York and London.Google Scholar
Messenger, P. S. and van den Bosch, R.. 1971. The adaptability of introduced biological control agents, pp. 68–92. In Huffaker, C. B. (Ed.), Biological control. Plenum Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
Philippe, R. 1970. Biologie de la reproduction de Chrysopa perla (L.) (Névroptères-Chrysopidae). Thèse, L'Université Paul-Sabatier de Toulouse. 133 pp.Google Scholar
Pratt, J. J. Jr., House, H. L., and Mansingh, A.. 1972. Insect control strategies based on nutritional principles: A prospectus, pp. 651–668. In Rodriguez, J. G. (Ed.), Insect and mite nutrition. North Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Tauber, C. A. and Tauber, M. J.. 1973 a. Diversification and secondary intergradation of two Chrysopa carnea strains (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Can. Ent. 105: 1153–1167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tauber, M. J. and Tauber, C. A.. 1973 b. Dietary requirements for mating in Chrysopa oculata (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Can. Ent. 105: 79–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tauber, M. J. and Tauber, C. A.. 1973 c. Insect phenology: Criteria for analyzing dormancy and for forecasting postdiapause development and reproduction in the field. Search, Cornell Univ. 3: 1–16.Google Scholar
Tauber, M. J. and Tauber, C. A.. 1973 d. Nutritional and photoperiodic control of the seasonal reproductive cycle in Chrysopa mohave (Neuroptera). J. Insect Physiol. 19: 729–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjeder, B. 1966. Neuroptera-Planipennia. The lacewings of South Africa. 5. Chrysopidae. South African animal life 12: 228–534.Google Scholar