Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T13:54:08.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MATING BEHAVIOR OF RHAGOLETIS POMONELLA (DIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE) VI. SITE OF EARLY-SEASON ENCOUNTERS12

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

D. Courtney Smith  and
Ronald J. Prokopy
D. Courtney Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Massachusetts at Amherst 10003
Ronald J. Prokopy
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Massachusetts at Amherst 10003
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field observations of Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh) adults on apple and hawthorn trees revealed that mating encounters occur on leaves in early-season and shift to fruit with the onset of oviposition. Most matings on leaves are initiated from a male frontal approach to the female and most of those on fruit from a rear approach while the female is engaged in some phase of oviposition behavior. This suggests that matings on fruit may be forced matings with unreceptive females.

Résumé

Des observations de terrain effectuées sur le pommier et l’aubépine montrent que la rencontre des sexes chez la mouche de la pomme, Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh) a lieu sur le feuillage en début de saison, se déplaçant ensuite sur le fruit avec l’arrivée de la période de ponte. La majorité des accouplements sur le feuillage sont initiés par un mâle approchant une femelle de front, alors que sur le fruit, la majorité le sont suite à une approche de derrieère alors que la femelle est engagée dans une phase quelconque du comportement associé à la ponte. Ceci indiquerait que les accouplements ayant lieu sur le fruit sont possiblement des accouplements forcés de femelles non-réceptives.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 112 , Issue 6 , 01 June 1980 , pp. 585 - 590
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1980

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

AliNiazee, M. T. 1974. The western cherry fruit fly, Rhagoletis indifferens (Diptera: Tephritidae). 2. Aggressive behavior. Can. Ent. 106: 1201–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barton Browne, L. 1957. An investigation of the low frequency of mating of the Queensland fruit fly Strumeta tryoni (Frogg.). Aust. J. Zool. 5: 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggs, J. D. 1972. Aggressive behavior in the adult maggot (Diptera: Tephritidae). Can. Ent. 104: 349–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyce, A. M. 1934. Bionomics of the walnut husk fly, Rhagoletis completa. Hilgardia 8: 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, F. E. 1921. Walnut husk maggot. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric. 992. pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Bush, G. L. 1969. Mating behavior, host specificity, and the ecological significance of the sibling species in frugivorous flies of the genus Rhagoletis. Am. Nat. 103: 661–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christenson, L. D. and Foote, R. H.. 1960. Biology of fruit flies. A. Rev. Ent. 5: 171–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emlen, S. T. and Oring, L. W.. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197: 215–223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feron, M. 1962. L'instinct de reproduction chez la mouche méditerranéean des fruits Ceratitis capitata Wied. (Dipt. Trypetidae). Comportement sexuel. Comportement de ponte. Rev. Path. veg. Ent. agric. Fr. 41. 129 pp.Google Scholar
Fletcher, B. S. 1968. Storage and release of a sex phoromone by the Queensland fruit fly, Dacus tryoni (Diptera: Trypetidae). Nature 219: 631–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, B. S. and Giannakakis, A.. 1973. Factors limiting the response of females of the Queensland fruit fly, Dacus tryoni, to the sex pheromone of the male. J. Insect Physiol. 19: 1147–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katsoyannos, B. I. 1975. Oviposition-deterring, male-arresting, fruit-marking pheromone in Rhagoletis cerasi. Environ. Ent. 4: 802–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katsoyannos, B. I. 1976. Female attraction to males in Rhagoletis cerasi. Environ. Ent. 5: 474–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, H. S., Barry, B. D., Burnside, J. A., and Rhode, R. H.. 1976. Sperm precedence in female apple maggots alternately mated to normal and irradiated males. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 949–950.Google Scholar
Nakagawa, S., Farias, G. J., Suda, D., Cunningham, R. T., and Chambers, D. L.. 1971. Reproduction of the Mediterranean fruit fly: frequency of mating in the laboratory. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 949–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, J. L. 1972. Courtship behavior and evidence for a sex attractant in the male Caribbean fruit fly, Anastrepha suspensa. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 65: 1364–1367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neilson, W. T. A. 1975. Fecundity of virgin and mated apple maggot (Diptera: Tephritidae) females confined with apple and black wax domes. Can. Ent. 107: 909–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neilson, W. T. A. and McAllan, J. W.. 1965. Effects of mating on fecundity of the apple maggot, Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh). Can. Ent. 97: 276–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohinata, K., Jacobson, M., Nakagawa, S., Fujimoto, M., and Higa, H.. 1977. Mediterranean fruit fly: laboratory and field evaluations of synthetic sex pheromones. J. Environ. Sci. Health (A) 12: 67–78.Google Scholar
Parker, G. A. 1970. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biol. Rev. 45: 528–568.Google Scholar
Parker, G. A. 1974. Courtship persistence and female-guarding as male time investment strategies. Behavior 48: 157–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perdomo, A. J., Nation, J. L., and Baranowski, R. M.. 1976. Attraction of female and male Caribbean fruit flies to food-baited and male-baited traps under field conditions. Environ. Ent. 5: 1208–1210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, G. 1967. Laboratory observations on the mating behaviour of the island fruit fly Rioxa pornia (Diptera: Tephritidae). J. Aust. ent. Soc. 6: 127–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1975. Mating behavior in Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae). V. Virgin female attraction to male odor. Can. Ent. 107: 905–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. 1976. Feeding, mating, and oviposition activities of Rhagoletis fausta flies in nature. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 69: 899–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J., Bennett, E. W., and Bush, G. L.. 1971. Mating behavior in Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae). I. Site of assembly. Can. Ent. 103: 1405–1409.Google Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. and Bush, G. L.. 1972. Mating behavior in Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae). III. Male aggregation in response to an arrestant. Can. Ent. 104: 275–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. and Bush, G. L.. 1973 a. Mating behavior in Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae). IV. Courtship. Can. Ent. 105: 873–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. and Bush, G. L.. 1973 b. Oviposition by grouped and isolated apple maggot flies. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 66: 1197–1200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, R. J. and Hendrichs, J.. 1979. Mating behavior of Ceratitis capitata on a field-caged host tree. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 72: 642–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tychsen, P. H. 1977. Mating behavior of the Queensland fruit fly, Dacus tryoni (Diptera: Tephritidae), in field cages. J. Aust. ent. Soc. 16: 459–465.Google Scholar
Tzanakakis, M. E., Tsitsipis, J. A., and Economopoulos, A. P.. 1968. Frequency of mating in females of the olive fruit fly under laboratory conditions. J. econ. Ent. 61: 1309–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, R. P., Stoffolano, J. G. Jr., and Prokopy, R. J.. 1979. Long-term intake of protein and sucrose in relation to reproductive behavior of wild and laboratory cultured Rhagoletis pomonella flies. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 72: 41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar