Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:41:19.801Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Food-Plant Spectrum and Elimination of Disease of Cinnabar Moth Larvae, Hypocrita jacobaeae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

G. E. Bucher  and
P. Harris
G. E. Bucher
Affiliation:
Entomology Research Institute for Biological Control, Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Belleville, Ontario
P. Harris
Affiliation:
Entomology Research Institute for Biological Control, Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Belleville, Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The cinnabar moth, Hypocrita jacobaeae (L.), is the principal enemy of tansy ragwort, Senecio jacobaea L., in Europe. To determine if this moth could be safely liberated in Canada to control tansy ragwort, breeding stocks were imported as pupae from Sweden and Ireland for laboratory feeding tests. Larval feeding tests with various important economic plants before the moth was introduced to New Zealand from Britain (Cameron, 1935), to Australia from Britain (Currie and Fyfe, 1938), and to the United States from France (Parker, 1960) showed that the larvae would not survive on any of those tested. Such investigations specifically excluded certain crops from damage by the moth but did not indicate the range of plants that can be eaten. It is essential that an insect used in weed control should be highly restricted in its diet. If this restriction is related to nutrient discrimination, as described by Kennedy and Booth (1951) for Aphis fabae Scop., it would be necessary to screen many more economic plants than if it is related to “secondary” plant substances associated with a taxonomic group, as described by Fraenkel (1953). Thus, besides ad hoc tests on important plants, tests to determine the potential host spectrum of an insect are warranted before it is liberated against a weed. The plant spectrum of the cinnabar moth was determined by feeding the larvae on several genera in the tribe Senecioneae and representatives of most other tribes of Compositae that occur in Canada.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 93 , Issue 10 , October 1961 , pp. 931 - 936
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1961

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

Cameron, D. 1935. A study of the natural control of ragwort (Senecio jacobaea L.). J. Ecol. 23: 265–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization 1959. Annual Report: 11 (1958–59): 65.Google Scholar
Currie, G. A., and Fyfe, R. V.. 1938. The fate of certain European insects introduced into Australia for the control of weeds, J. Council Sci. Ind. Res. 11: 289–301.Google Scholar
Dodd, A. P. 1940. The biological campaign against prickly-pear. Commonwealth Prickly Pear Board, Brisbane, Australia, 177 pp.Google Scholar
Fantham, H. B., and Porter, A.. 1913. The pathogenicity of Nosema apis to insects other than hive bees. Ann. Trop. Med. 7: 569–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, G. [1956]. Insects and plant biochemistry. The specificity of food plants for insects. Proc. XIV Int. Congr. Zool., Copenhagen (1953): 383–387.Google Scholar
Fullaway, D. T. 1954. Biological control of cactus in Hawaii. J. Econ. Ent. 47: 696–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, K. M. 1957. An annotated list and bibliography of insects reported to have virus diseases. Hilgardia 26: 597–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, J. S., and Booth, C. O.. 1951. Host alteration in Aphis fabae Scop. Feeding preferences and fecundity in relation to the age and kind of leaves. Ann. Appl. Biol. 38: 25–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kudo, R. 1924. A biologic and taxonomic study of the microsporidia. Illinois Biol. Monogr. 9(2 and 3), 268 pp.Google Scholar
Martignoni, M. E., and Langston, R. L.. 1960. Supplement to an annotated list and bibliography of insects reported to have virus diseases. Hilgardia 30: 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. 1929. Control of ragwort: experimental work with cinnabar moth. New Zealand J. Sci. Tech. 11: 112–119.Google Scholar
Parker, H. L. 1960. Starvation tests with larvae of the cinnabar moth. J. Econ. Ent. 53: 472–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, H. M. 1960a. Variation of some of the characteristics used to distinguish between species of microsporidia; I. Spore size. J. Ins. Path. 2: 147–151.Google Scholar
Thomson, H. M. 1960b. Nosema cerasivoranae n. sp., a microsporidian parasite of the ugly-nest caterpillar, Archips cerasivorana (Fitch). Canadian J. Zool. 38: 643–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, H. M. 1960c. A list and brief description of the microsporidia infecting insects. J. Ins. Path. 2: 346–385.Google Scholar