Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T01:59:09.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The first of five moults of Forficula auricularia L. (Dermaptera: Forficulidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2020

Jean-Claude Tourneur ,
Claire Cole  and
Joël Meunier Open the ORCID record for Joël Meunier [Opens in a new window]
Jean-Claude Tourneur*
Affiliation:
Département des Sciences Biologiques, Université du Québec à Montréal, 141 Avenue du Président-Kennedy, Montréal, Québec, H2X 1Y4, Canada
Claire Cole
Affiliation:
Wilfred Avenue, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3B 9R9, Canada
Joël Meunier*
Affiliation:
Institut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l’Insecte (IRBI), Unité mixte de recherche 7261, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Université de Tours, Tours, France
*
*Corresponding authors. Emails: [email protected]; [email protected]
*Corresponding authors. Emails: [email protected]; [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Most studies about the European earwig Forficula auricularia L. (Dermaptera: Forficulidae) assume that four larval moults occur from hatching to adult. In this note, we use observational and quantitative approaches to reveal the presence of an additional intermediate moult occurring immediately after egg hatching. We then briefly discuss how this finding may open up new possibilities for follow-up studies to improve our general understanding of the taxonomy, biology, and evolution of this species.

Type
Scientific Notes
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 152 , Issue 6 , December 2020 , pp. 783 - 789
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Entomological Society of Canada

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.)

Footnotes

Subject Editor: Zhen Zou

References

Albouy, V. and Caussanel, C. 1990. Dermaptères ou perce-oreilles. Faune de France. Edited by Fédération française des Sociétés de Sciences Naturelles. Paris, France. 245 pp.Google Scholar
Behura, B.K. 1956. The biology of the European earwig, Forficula auricularia Linn. Annals of Zoology, 1: 117–142.Google Scholar
Belles, X. 2011. Origin and evolution of insect metamorphosis. In eLS. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, United Kingdom. Pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470015902.a0022854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boos, S., Meunier, J., Pichon, S., and Kölliker, M. 2014. Maternal care provides antifungal protection to eggs in the European earwig. Behavioral Ecology, 25: 754–761. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/aru046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cai, L.J. and Hua, B.Z. 2009. Morphology of the immature stages of Panorpa qinlingensis (Mecoptera: Panorpidae) with notes on its biology. Entomologica Fennica, 20: 215–224. https://doi.org/10.33338/ef.84480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, R.F. 2013. The insects: Structure and function. Fifth edition. Edited by S.J. Simpson and A.E. Douglas. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America and London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Chapman, R.F. and Reynolds, S. 2013. Postembryonic development. In The insects: Structure and function. Fifth edition. Edited by S.J. Simpson and A.E. Douglas. Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America and London, United Kingdom. Pp. 399–459.Google Scholar
Chapman, T.A. 1917a. Notes on early stages and life history of earwig (Forficula auricularia L.). Entomological Research, 29: 25–30.Google Scholar
Chapman, T.A. 1917b. Further notes on the earwig. Entomological Research, 29: 177–180.Google Scholar
Cooper, K.W. 1966. Ruptor ovi, the number of moults in development, and method of exit from masoned nests. Biology of eumenine wasps, VII. Psyche, 73: 238–250. https://doi.org/10.1155/1966/79234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corteel, M., Dantas-Lima, J.J., Wille, M., Alday-Sanz, V., Pensaert, M.B., Sorgeloos, P., and Nauwynck, H.J. 2009. Molt stage and cuticle damage influence white spot syndrome virus immersion infection in penaeid shrimp. Veterinary Microbiology, 137: 209–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2009.01.018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crumb, S.E., Eide, P.M., and Bonn, A.E. 1941. The European earwig. United States Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin 766. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., United States of America.Google Scholar
Diehl, J.M.C. and Meunier, J. 2018. Surrounding pathogens shape maternal egg care but not egg production in the European earwig. Behavioral Ecology, 29: 128–136. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arx140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyar, H.G. 1890. The number of molts of lepidopterous larvae. Psyche, 5: 420–422. https://doi.org/10.1155/1890/23871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, R., Chapman, C., Taylor, A., Neil, D., and Vickerman, K. 1992. Infection of the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus by a Hematodinium-like species of dinoflagellate on the west coast of Scotland. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 13: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3354/dao013001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulton, B.E.B. 1924. The European earwig. Oregon Agricultural College Experiment Station. Station Bulletin, 207: 1–29.Google Scholar
Henson, H. 1946. On the malpighian tubules of Forficula auricularia (Dermaptera). Proceedings of the Royal Entomological Society of London. Series A, General Entomology, 21: 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365–3032.1946.tb01157.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henson, H. 1947. The growth and form of the head and antennae in the earwig (F. auricularia Linn.). Proceedings of the Leeds Philosophical Society, 5: 21–32.Google Scholar
Herter, K. 1943. Zur Fortpflanzungsbiologie eines lebendgebärenden Ohrwurmes (Prolabia arachidis Yersin). Zeitschrift für Morphologie und Ökologie der Tiere, 40: 158–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, D.W. 1917. The European earwig and its control. United State Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin, 566: 12.Google Scholar
Koch, L.K. and Meunier, J. 2014. Mother and offspring fitness in an insect with maternal care: phenotypic trade-offs between egg number, egg mass and egg care. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 14: 125. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471–2148–14–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kölliker, M. 2007. Benefits and costs of earwig (Forficula auricularia) family life. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 61: 1489–1497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265–007–0381–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamb, R.J. 1976. Parental behavior in the dermaptera with special reference to Forficula auricularia (Dermaptera: Forficulidae). Canadian Journal of Entomology, 108: 609–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lhoste, J. 1942. Les stades larvaires et la division des articles antennaires chez Forficula auricularia L. (Dermaptera.). Bulletin de la Société entomologique de France, 47: 35–38.Google Scholar
Meunier, J., Wong, J.W.Y., Gómez, Y., Kuttler, S., Röllin, L., Stucki, D., and Kölliker, M. 2012. One clutch or two clutches? Fitness correlates of coexisting alternative female life-histories in the European earwig. Evolutionary Ecology, 26: 669–682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682–011–9510-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quarrell, S.R., Arabi, J., Suwalski, A., Veuille, M., Wirth, T., and Allen, G.R. 2018. The invasion biology of the invasive earwig, Forficula auricularia, in Australasian ecosystems. Biological Invasions, 20: 1553–1565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530–017–1646–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolff, J., Johnston, P.R., and Reynolds, S. 2019. Complete metamorphosis of insects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 374. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shull, D.R., Stewart, R.L., and Paulson, G.S. 2010. Application of Dyar’s Law to life stages of Sigara mathesoni (Heteroptera: Corixidae). Entomological News, 121: 469–474. https://doi.org/10.3157/021.121.0509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tourneur, J.-C. 2018. Factors affecting the egg-laying pattern of Forficula auricularia (Dermaptera: Forficulidae) in three climatologically different zones of North America. The Canadian Entomologist, 150: 511–519. https://doi.org/10.4039/tce.2018.24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tourneur, J.-C. and Gingras, J. 1992. Egg laying in a northeastern North American (Montréal, Québec) population of Forficula auricularia L. (Dermaptera: Forficulidae). The Canadian Entomologist, 124: 1055–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tourneur, J.-C. and Meunier, J. 2020. Variations in seasonal (not mean) temperatures drive rapid adaptations to novel environments at a continent scale. Ecology, 101: e02973. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Meyel, S., Devers, S., and Meunier, J. 2019. Love them all: mothers provide care to foreign eggs in the European earwig Forficula auricularia. Behavioral Ecology, 30: 756–762. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arz012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogelweith, F., Körner, M., Foitzik, S., and Meunier, J. 2017. Age, pathogen exposure, but not maternal care shape offspring immunity in an insect with facultative family life. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 17: 69. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862–017–0926-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wirth, T., Le Guellec, R., Vancassel, M., and Veuille, M. 1998. Molecular and reproductive characterization of sibling species in the European earwig (Forficula auricularia). Evolution, 52: 260.Google Scholar