Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T06:01:57.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE FEEDING POTENTIAL OF CORTICEUS GLABER AND CORTICEUS PARALLELUS (COLEOPTERA: TENEBRIONIDAE), FACULTATIVE PREDATORS OF THE SOUTHERN PINE BEETLE, DENDROCTONUS FRONTALIS (COLEOPTERA: SCOLYTIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Richard A. Goyer  and
Michael T. Smith
Richard A. Goyer
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge 70803
Michael T. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge 70803
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Under laboratory conditions, Corticeus glaber (LeConte) and C. parallelus (Melsheimer) adults were facultative predators of southern pine beetle, Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann, eggs and first and second instar larvae. Southern pine beetle frass and blue stain fungus, Ceratocystis minor (Hedgecock) Hunt were also suitable for survival for both species of Corticeus. Loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) phloem was not utilized as a food source by either species. Corticeus spp. larvae were predators of D. frontalis eggs.

Résumé

Sous des conditions de laboratoire, les adultes de Corticeus glaber (LeConte) et de C. parallelus (Melsheimer) se sont révélés être des prédateurs facultatifs des œufs et des larves de 1° et 2° stade du dendroctone méridional du pin, Dendroctonus frontalis Zimmermann. Les déjections et le champignon Ceratocystis minor (Hedgecock) Hunt conviennent également à garder les deux espèces de Corticeus en vie. Le phloème du pin Pinus taeda L. n’a pas été utilisé comme source de nourriture par aucune des espèces. Les larves des Corticeus spp. étaient prédatrices des œufs de D. frontalis.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 113 , Issue 9 , September 1981 , pp. 807 - 811
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1981

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

DeLeon, D. 1934. An annotated list of the parasites, predators and other associated fauna of the mountain pine beetle in western white pine and lodgepole pine. Can. Ent. 66: 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gusev, V. I. 1928. Beneficial insects found in trees infested with bark beetles. Bull. Inst. For., Leningrad (Petrograd Lienoi Inst.: Izvestiia) 36: 133–153.Google Scholar
Hopkins, A. D. 1893. Catalogue of West Virginia Scolytidae and their enemies. Bull. W. Va. agric. Exp. Stn 31: 121–168.Google Scholar
Moser, J. C., Thatcher, R. C., and Pickard, L. S.. 1971. Relative abundance of southern pine beetle associated in East Texas. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 72–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overgaard, N. A. 1968. Insects associated with the southern pine beetle in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. J. econ. Ent. 61: 1197–1201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, D. C. and Davis, D. W.. 1971. Feeding habits of Corticeus substriatus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) associated with mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 293–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M. T. and Goyer, R. A.. 1980. Relative abundance and seasonal occurrence of Corticeus glaber and Corticeus parallelus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) associates of the southern pine beetle, Dendroctonus frontalis (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Can. Ent. 112: 515–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stebbing, E. P. 1914. Indian Forest Insects of Economic Importance. London. 648 pp.Google Scholar
Stein, C. R. and Coster, J. E.. 1977. Distribution of some predators and parasites of the southern pine beetle in two species of pine. Environ. Ent. 6: 689–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Struble, G. R. 1930. The biology of certain Coleoptera associated with bark beetles in western yellow pine. Univ. Calif. Publs Ent. 5: 105–134.Google Scholar