DOCSLIB.ORG

Functional Agro-Biodiversity (FAB) How to Maximize Pollination and Biocontrol Services While Preserving Nature Values

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Functional Agro-Biodiversity (FAB) How to Maximize Pollination and Biocontrol Services While Preserving Nature Values Functional agro-biodiversity (FAB) How to maximize pollination and biocontrol services while preserving nature values Felix Wäckers Agri Environment Schemes Agriculture Environment Focus on conservation Agri Environment Schemes Agriculture Environment Focus on ecosystem services €320 billion/year €90 billion/year (Constanza 1997) How to optimize services? Traditional paradigm: Enhance diversity (diversity = stability = services) Does it work? Example biological pest control Andow D.A. (Ann. Rev. Entomol. 36: 561-586) Vegetational diversity and pest control Effects variable • 52% of published studies on agroecosystem diversification report reduced pest populations • 33% had no effect or variable effects • 15% resulted in increased pest populations. How to optimize services? Traditional paradigm: Enhance diversity Functional biodiversity: Selectively enhance diversity Focus on functional groups that provide ecosystem services Targeted landscape management Bottleneck: Lack of nectar and pollen in many crops ConsumerThe impact benefits of nectar sources on biocontrol efficacy 30 Control 1 (N=6) 25 Control 2 (N=5) Nectar 1 (N=6) 20 Nectar 2 (N=6) 15 10 5 average number parasitized caterpillars parasitized number average 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 age wasp [days] Winkler et al., (2006) Biological control agents depending on nectar/pollen feeding. Type Plant- Arthropod examples can be found within: Type of plant Reference feeding food utilised stage Life-history adult Neuroptera: Chrysopidae (green lacewings) nectar, pollen (Stelzl 1991) omnivory Diptera: Syrphidae (hoverflies) nectar, pollen (Hickman et al. 1995) Cecidomyiidae (gall midges) nectar (Opit 1997) Tachinidea (parasitoid flies) nectar (Gilbert and Jervis 1998) Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae, Braconidae, nectar (Jervis 1998) a.o. (parasitoid wasps) nectar (Lewis 1998) Vespidae (social wasps) nectar, fruit (Cuautle and Rico Formicidae (ants) nectar (Beattie 1985) Coleoptera: Meloidae (blister beetles) nectar, pollen juvenile Heteroptera: Pentatomidae (stink bugs) plant-juice Temporal adult Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae, Braconidae, nectar (Jervis 1998) omnivory a.o. (host feeding parasitoids) (Wackers 2003) Coleoptera: Cicindelidae (tiger beetles) seeds (Zerm and Adis 2001) juvenile Araneae: Araneidae (orb web spiders) pollen (Smith and Mommsen 1984) Permanent adult & Acari:Mesostigmat Phytoseiidae nectar (van Rijn and Tanigoshi 1999a) omnivory juvenile (predatory mites) pollen (van Rijn and Tanigoshi 1999b) Heteroptera: Pentatomidae (stink bugs) plant juice (Ruberson et al. 1986) Miridae (mirid bugs) plant juice (Gillespie and McGregor 2000) Geocorinae (big-eyed bugs) plant juice Eubanks & Styrsky, this vol. Anthocoridae (flower bugs) pollen Eubanks & Styrsky, this vol. Neuroptera: Chrysopa, Hemerobiidae nectar, pollen (Stelzl 1991) (brown lacewings) (McEwen et al. 1993) Thysanoptera: Aeolothripidae, Phlaeothripidae leaves, pollen (Kirk 1997) Coccinellidae (ladybirds) nectar (Pemberton and Vandenberg Coleoptera: Carabidae (ground beetles) pollen 1993) seeds (Cottrell and Yeargan 1998) (Goldschmidt and Toft 1997) Targeted landscape management Informed selection of non-crop plants as a multifunctional tool to optimize ecosystem services - Select plants that optimize biological pest control or pollination - Select plants that avoid stimulation of pests - Select plants that generate multiple ecosystem services (Wäckers and van Rijn, 2012) Select plants that optimize biological pest control Choice Longevity (AFLI) Floral Hoverfly Hoverfly Lacewing References parasitoids family species Nectar Parasitoids E. balteatus E. balteatus C. carnea (species) depth Apiaceae Ammi majus 0 + + + - Geneau et al., unpubl. (Microplitis mediator) Apiaceae Coriandrum sativum 0 + + +/- Vattala et al., 2006 (Microtonus hyperodae) Apiaceae Daucus carota 0 +/- + ++ + Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Apiaceae Foeniculum vulgare 0 + + + Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Apiaceae Heracleum spondylium 0 +/- + +/- Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Apiaceae Pastinaca sativa 0 + + ++ +/- Foster & Ruessink, 1984 (Meteorus rubens) Polygonaceae Fagopyrum esculentum 0 + + + + Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Boraginaceae Borago officinalis 0 - + ++ - Nilsson et al., unpubl. (Trybliographa rapae) Ranunculaceae Ranunculus acris 0 + + - Kehrli & Bacher, 2008 (Minotetrastichus frontalis) Caryophyllaceae Gypsophila elegans 1 +/- + ++ Asteraceae Matricaria chamomilla 1 +/- + + - Nilsson et al., unpubl. (Trybliographa rapae) Asteraceae Achillea millefolium 1 +/- + +/- - Wäckers 2004 (Cotesia glomerata) Asteraceae L Cichorium intybus 1 - - + Asteraceae Chrysanthemum segetum 2 +/- + + Asteraceae Anthemis tinctoria 2 - +/- +/- Asteraceae Leucanthemum vulgare 2 +/- + - Wäckers 2004 (Cotesia glomerata) Asteraceae Tanacetum vulgare 2 - - +/- Asteraceae Calendula officinalis 3 - - Rahat et al., 2005 (Trissolcus basalis) Asteraceae Centaurea cyanus (+EFN) 3 +/- + ++ +/- Winkler et al., 2009 (Cotesia glomerata) Asteraceae Helianthus annuus (+EFN) 3 + + Asteraceae Cosmos bipinnatus 4 - - +/- + Rahat et al., 2005 (Trissolcus basalis) Malvaceae Malva sylvestris 4 - - - Boraginaceae Phacelia tanacetifolia 4 +/- +/- +/- - Irvin et al., 2007 (Gonatocerus spp.) Fabaceae Medicago sativa 4 - - - Kehrli & Bacher, 2008 (Minotetrastichus frontalis) Fabaceae Vicia sativa (+EFN) 4 - + ++ Geneau et al., unpubl. (Microplitis mediator) Fabaceae Lotus corniculatus 4 - - Selecting plants that avoid stimulation of pests (Winkler et al., 2009) 20 Pest 18 16 14 12 10 survival (days) survival Pieris rapae 8 Cotesia glomerata 6 4 Biological control agent 2 0 Medicago sp. Control (water) Daucus carota Centaurea jacae Origanum vulgareOrnithopus sativus Trifolium pratenseCentaurea cyanus Anethum graveolens Fagopyrum esculentum Selecting plants that generate multiple ecosystem services Pollination Biocontrol Pollinator mix Biocontrol mix Combination (Campbell, Biesmeijer Varma & W & Varma Biesmeijer (Campbell, ä ckers, 2012) ckers, Taking it to the field Large scale biodiversity project in the Hoekse Waard working with conventional growers. Addition of annual and perennial field margins to existing landscape features (polders, dikes, creeks, canal borders). Fruit Orchards (cider, UK) Optimizing Ecosystem Services in Terms of Agronomy and Conservation (ECOSTAC.CO.UK) Growing Wild Beneficial insects in field margins 300 June - Sept 2010 Insects observed in flowering field margin Insects observed in grassy margin 250 200 150 100 Mean insects observed insects Mean 50 0 Hoverflies Bumble bees Parasitoid w asps Ladybirds Beneficial insect group 250 June-Sept 2011 Insects observed in flowering field margin Insects observed in grassy field margin 200 150 100 Mean insects observed insects Mean 50 0 Hoverflies Bumble bees Parasitoid w asps Ladybirds Beneficial insect group Aphids in peas 0.8 70 Aphid % distribution 0.7 % parasitism 60 0.6 50 0.5 40 0.4 30 0.3 % parasitism % 20 0.2 Proportional aphidProportionaldistribution 0.1 10 0 0 08.06 15.06 22.06 29.06 06.07 08.06 15.06 22.06 29.06 06.07 08.06 15.06 22.06 29.06 06.07 CF1 - CF2 - CF3 Sample site and date The positive spiral More beneficials Fewer pests More biodiversity Fewer pesticides Yield impact? wheat (yield in tonnes/ha) 10 9 8 7 6 5 +12% 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 peas (yield in tonnes/ha) 7 6 5 4 +26% 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 carrots (yield in tonnes/ha) 9 8 7 6 +32% 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Focus on benefits to the agricultural industry Functional Biodiversity • Shows that yield and conservation are not conflicting objectives • Helps growers cope with ongoing decline in pollinators and reduced availability of registered agrochemicals • Compatible with current practices • Creates additional economic incentives for farmers to engage in Agri-Environment Schemes • Makes CAP greening a win-win for farmers and nature Spraying Food Supplements Nutrimite 6/11/2014 NutrimiteTM Advice Dosage 500 g / ha / application (0,45 lbs / acre / application) Interval Every 2 weeks N° of applications min. 2-3 times, depending on predatory mite density Application method To dust Use: Better establishment and rapid population growth even before pests arrive! 6/11/2014 Effect Nutrimite in Gerbera Juliette Pijnakker Effect of nutrimite on A. swirskii in Calathea Pijnakker & De Souza, Biobest More with Less Juliette Pijnakker, Biobest Crop: - Cut roses Result: - 2,5 times more predatory mites after 1 x introduction en 3 x Nutrimite as compared to 3 x introductions! Belgium Biobest et al. Bron: J.,Bron: Pijnakker, Thanks Is it worth the bother? Aren’t existing landscape elements enough? Do diverse bird conservation margins benefit biological pest control? Meteorus autographae Parasitoid feeding at a vetch nectary overall sugar levels in Meteorus autographae ug/wesp 40 35 Conclusions 30 25 High diversity field margins for bobwhite 20 quail conservation failed to provide food 15 to a biological control agent and did not 10 enhance biological pest control in the 5 0 adjacent crop. control bobwhite cahaba vetch Parasitoids did clearly benefit from pure stands of cahaba white vetch. Impact on Biocontrol is a function of resource availability (flower suitability), rather than diversity. Parasitoid feeding at a vetch nectary.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Moving on from the Insect Apocalypse Narrative
    Moving on from the insect apocalypse narrative: engaging with evidence-based insect conservation Manu E. Saunders1,2, Jasmine Janes1,3, James O’Hanlon1 1School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England Armidale NSW Australia 2UNE Business School, University of New England Armidale NSW Australia 3Biology Department, Vancouver Island University, Nanaimo, BC, Canada This is the author’s version of a manuscript published in BioScience. Please cite as: Saunders ME, Janes J, O’Hanlon J (2019) Moving on from the insect apocalypse narrative: engaging with evidence-based insect conservation. BioScience https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz143 1 Abstract Recent studies showing temporal changes in local and regional insect populations received exaggerated global media coverage. Confusing and inaccurate science communication on this important issue could have counter-productive effects on public support for insect conservation. The ‘insect apocalypse’ narrative is fuelled by a limited number of studies that are restricted geographically (predominantly UK, Europe, USA) and taxonomically (predominantly bees, macrolepidoptera, and ground beetles). Biases in sampling and analytical methods (e.g. categorical vs. continuous time series, different diversity metrics) limit the relevance of these studies as evidence of generalised global insect decline. Rather, the value of this research lies in highlighting important areas for priority investment. We summarise research, communication and policy priorities for evidence-based insect conservation, including key areas of knowledge to increase understanding of insect population dynamics. Importantly, we advocate for a balanced perspective in science communication to better serve both public and scientific interests. 2 Introduction Insects are the most diverse and abundant group of animals on Earth and are critical drivers of ecosystem function in terrestrial and aquatic systems; yet the majority of insect taxa are understudied, publicly misunderstood and face numerous environmental threats (Samways 2007; Cardoso et al.
    [Show full text]
  • (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a Parasitoid of Pieris Brassicae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae), As Affected by Experience
    WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY LABORATORY OF ENTOMOLOGY Host discrimination by Cotesia glomerata (L.) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a parasitoid of Pieris brassicae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae), as affected by experience No: 09.04 Name: Linda Heilmann Period: January 2004 – July 2004 Thesis: F050-707 1e Examinator: dr. ir. Joop A. van Loon 2e Examinator: dr. Nina E. Fatouros Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3 1.1. Host discrimination and superparasitism ................................................................ 3 1.2. Host searching by Cotesia glomerata ..................................................................... 5 1.2.1. Host microhabitat location ....................................................................... 5 1.2.2. Host location and host acceptance ............................................................ 7 1.3. Learning ............................................................................................................ 7 1.3.1. Learning in parasitoid wasps .................................................................... 7 1.3.2. Completeness of the information .............................................................10 1.3.3. Order of the information.........................................................................11 1.4. Previous research...............................................................................................11 2. Research questions .........................................................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Materials and Methods
    Plant mediated effects on the outcome of competition between two parasitoid wasps Cotesia rubecula and Cotesia glomerata (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) MSc Thesis – ENT-80436 Report no. 010.05 June – December 2009 Laboratory of Entomology Wageningen University Student: Anna Efremova MSc Plant Sciences Reg. no 861130217090 1st Examinator: Dr. Ir. Erik H. Poelman Plant Sciences Group 2nd Examinator: Prof. Dr. Marcel Dicke Plant Sciences Group ABSTRACT Parasitoid biology is tightly linked with their herbivore hosts, as their offspring develop in herbivores. Several parasitoid species exploit the same herbivore and as a result parasitoids may compete over herbivore hosts. In nature herbivore-parasitoid interactions occur within a complex insect community, which implies presence of several non-host species in the vicinity. Plants under herbivore attack emit specific volatiles, which selectively attracts parasitoids. Volatile information emitted by the plants, infested with non-host herbivore can distort searching environment of parasitoids. Thus, parasitoids involved in competitive interactions under complex environment have to rely on adaptive mechanisms, which would modify their host searching behavior. We studied competition for the host Pieris rapae between two congeneric parasitoids, Cotesia rubecula and C. glomerata under different micro-environments: when non-host feed on neighboring plants and when non-host feed on the same plant with the host. Moreover, we studied which adaptive mechanisms of wasps were responsible for the outcome of competitive interactions; here we focused on learning capabilities of wasps. Hypothesis that C. glomerata wasps, being an inferior competitor to C. rubecula inside a host body, would suffer less from competition with C. rubecula was confirmed. Although C.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Selection and Genetic Differentiation of Behaviour Between Parasitoids from Wild and Cultivated Habitats
    Heredity 83 (1999) 127±137 Received 20 November 1998, accepted 18 March 1999 Natural selection and genetic differentiation of behaviour between parasitoids from wild and cultivated habitats SASKYA VAN NOUHUYS* & SARA VIA Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, U.S.A. Dierences in behaviour between individuals in populations living in dierent environments may result from evolution proceeding dierently in each population. The parasitoid wasp Cotesia glomerata (L.) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) parasitizes early instar larvae of butter¯ies in the family Pieridae. In the study area the only host of C. glomerata is the Small Cabbage White Butter¯y [Pieris rapae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae)], which feeds on cruciferous host plants in a variety of habitats. The behaviour of this parasitoid wasp collected from two habitat types (wild and agricultural) was observed in a reciprocal transplant-style experiment in a greenhouse. Dierences in behaviour between wasp sources and test habitat type were analysed using canonical analysis in multivariate analysis of variance. Directional selection on parasitoid behaviour in each test habitat type was estimated by regressing the relative rate of parasitism (a measure of relative ®tness) on the behavioural character state. We found that there is genetic dierentiation of behaviour between wasps from wild and cultivated habitats and that a dierent set of behaviours is associated with short-term ®tness within models of each source habitat. There was no evidence of local adaptation of wasps to either habitat. Keywords: Cotesia glomerata, evolution, foraging behaviour, Pieris rapae, tritrophic interaction. Introduction have been shown to orientate upwind towards odour sources (see van Alphen & Vet, 1986; Turlings et al., Natural selection in dierent habitat types can lead to 1991; Benrey et al., 1997), and to orientate towards genetic divergence and local adaptation of populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Host Location by Hyperparasitoids: an Ecogenomic Approach
    Host location by hyperparasitoids: an ecogenomic approach Feng Zhu Thesis committee Promotor Prof. Dr Marcel Dicke Professor of Entomology Wageningen University Co-promoter Dr Erik H. Poelman Assistant professor, Laboratory of Entomology Wageningen University Other members Prof. Dr Niels P. R. Anten, Wageningen University Prof. Dr Monique M. van Oers, Wageningen University Dr T. Martijn Bezemer, Netherlands Institute of Ecology, Wageningen Dr Klaas Vrieling, Leiden University This research was conducted under the auspices of the graduate school Experimental Plant Sciences. Host location by hyperparasitoids: an ecogenomic approach Feng Zhu Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of doctor at Wageningen University by the authority of the Rector Magnificus Prof. Dr. A.P.J. Mol in the presence of the Thesis Committee appointed by the Academic Board to be defended in public on Friday 2 October 2015 at 1:30 p.m. in the Aula Feng Zhu Host location by hyperparasitoids: an ecogenomic approach, 192 pages. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, NL (2015) With references, with summary in English ISBN 978-94-6257-444-1 To my beloved parents 谨以此书，献给我最亲爱的父母 Abstract It is fascinating that our ecological systems are structured by both direct and indirect spe- cies interactions. In terrestrial ecosystems, plants interact with many species of insects that include both harmful herbivores and beneficial natural enemies of herbivores. During the last 30 years, substantial progress has been made in different plant-insect systems regarding plant trait-mediated species interactions in a tritrophic context. However, plant- based food webs generally consist of more than three trophic levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Braconidae, Braconid Wasps
    Beneficial Insects Class Insecta, Insects Order Hymenoptera, Ants, bees, and wasps Hymenoptera means “membraneous wings.“ The hind wings are smaller than the front wings and have a row of tiny hooks, hamuli, that attach the two wings. There are two suborders. The smaller suborder includes sawflies and horntails, which are phytophagous. Bees, wasps, and ants belong to the larger suborder, which includes nectar, pollen, and insect feeders. Hymenoptera is the second largest group of insects, most of which are beneficial. These insects undergo complete metamorphosis and have complex behaviors. Most parasitic wasps do not sting humans. All hymenopterans have chewing mouthparts. Braconid wasps Family Braconidae Description and life yhistory: There are over 1000 known species of Braconid parasitoids. They are mostly internal parasitoids, but many emerge to pupate outside their dead hosts. Adults are usually less than 13 mm long, with a slender abdomen that is longer than the head and thorax combined. They are popular biological control agents, because they are good searchers, even at low host densities. Prey species: Braconid hosts include larvae of beetles, Braconid wasp parasitoid reared from an aphid mummy. (340) caterpillars, flies and sawflies. Cotesia congregata attacks Photo: John Davidson tomato hornworm larvae, C. glomerata attacks imported cabbageworm larvae, and C. melanoscelus attacks gypsy moth larvae. Braconids are also an important parasitoid of aphids. Each female can attack between 200–300 aphids in a two-week lifespan. Aphidius matricariae, A. colemani, and A. ervi are commercially available for control against green peach aphid, melon aphid, cotton aphid in greenhouses, and soybean aphid. Lysiphlebus testaceipes also attacks greenbug aphids and cotton aphids, while Diaeretiella rapae attacks greenbug aphids, Russian wheat aphid, corn leaf aphid, and English grain aphid.
    [Show full text]
  • A Misplaced Sense of Risk: Variation in U.S
    United States Department of Agriculture A MISPLACED SENSE OF RISK: VARIATION IN U.S. STANDARDS FOR MANAGEMENT OF RISKS POSED BY NEW SPECIES INTRODUCED FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES Roy G. Van Driesche, Robert M. Nowierski, and Richard C. Reardon LEVEL OF REGULATION FISH & FUR-BEARING ANIMALS PETS HORTICULTURE ANIMALS VECTORING DISEASE BIOCONTROL AGENTS nutria LEAST REGULATED Burmese python MOST DANGEROUS kudzu smothering trees kudzu native frog killed by chytrid fungus fire belly toad thistle-feeding weevil trees being killed by nutria MOST REGULATED python eating deer LEAST DANGEROUS thistle seedhead destroyed by weevil HORTICULTURE ANIMALS VECTORING DISEASE FISH & FUR-BEARING ANIMALS PETS BIOCONTROL AGENTS LEVEL OF RISK Forest Health Assessment FHAAST-2019-02 and Applied Sciences Team July 2020 The Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 by the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. FHTET became Forest Health Assessment and Applied Sciences Team (FHAAST) in 2016. This booklet was published by FHAAST as part of the technology transfer series. https://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/applied-sciences/index.shtml Cover Photos: (a) nutria (Philippe Amelant, Wikipedia.org); (b) Burmese python (Roy Wood, National Park Service, Bugwood.org); (c) kudzu (Marco Schmidt, iNaturalist.org); (d) fire belly toad (Kim, Hyun-tae, iNaturalist.org); (e) thistle- feeding weevil (Eric Coombs, Oregon Department of Agriculture, Bugwood.org); (f) kudzu blanketing trees (Kerry Britton, USDA Forest Service, Bugwood.org); (g) native frog killed by chytrid fungus (Brian Gratwicke, iNaturalist. a b c d e org); (h) trees being killed by nutria (Gerald J.
    [Show full text]
  • Host-Parasitoid Relationship in Different Cotesia Melitaearum and Melitaea Cinxia Populations Around the Baltic Sea
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Helsingin yliopiston digitaalinen arkisto Host-parasitoid relationship in different Cotesia melitaearum and Melitaea cinxia populations around the Baltic Sea Cotesia melitaearum egg Photo by Suvi Pakarinen 2010 Master’s Thesis Suvi Pilvi Pakarinen Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences University of Helsinki March 2011 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 3 1.1. Hosts, parasitoids and the aim of this study ................................................ 3 1.2. A short introduction to metapopulation studies ........................................... 5 1.3. Parasitoid virulence and host immune response .......................................... 6 1.4. Inbreeding .................................................................................................. 8 1.5. Local adaptation of hosts and their parasitoids ............................................ 9 1.6. Research questions ................................................................................... 11 2. Materials and methods ............................................................................................ 11 2.1. Life cycle of Melitaea cinxia..................................................................... 11 2.2. Life cycle of Cotesia melitaearum ............................................................ 12 2.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Floral Nectar, Water, and Feeding Frequency on Cotesia
    BioControl (2008) 53:289–294 DOI 10.1007/s10526-007-9070-8 Effect of floral nectar, water, and feeding frequency on Cotesia glomerata longevity Jana C. Lee Æ George E. Heimpel Received: 1 June 2006 / Accepted: 4 January 2007 / Published online: 25 January 2007 Ó IOBC 2007 Abstract This study examined how water, sucrose, and frequency of nectar avail- ability affects the longevity of the parasitoid Cotesia glomerata (L.) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Under standard laboratory conditions, water did not extend longevity in the absence of sugar in three out of four comparisons, nor did it extend longevity with access to nectar. Cotesia glomerata lived 2–3 days when given water or nothing, 8–15 days when given buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum Moench) nectar daily with or without water, and 23–26 days when given a 50% sucrose solution. The lifespan of C. glomerata fed flowers every other day was one-third shorter than that of C. glomerata fed flowers every day, but this difference was not statistically signifi- cantly. Only minimal benefits occurred when flowers were given every 3 days. Keywords Braconidae Æ Hydration Æ Hymenoptera Æ Meal frequency Æ Parasitoid Æ Rearing Æ Sugar feeding Introduction Cotesia glomerata (L.) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) is an endoparasitoid of Pieris rapae (L.) and Pieris brassiceae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia. This parasitoid does not host feed but is strongly stimulated to feed on sucrose, glucose, and fructose (Wa¨ckers 1999), and feeding on these sugars increases their longevity 15-fold (Wa¨ckers 2001). Also, feeding on various floral nectars, especially annual buckwheat, Fagopyrum esculentum Moench J.
    [Show full text]
  • Superparasitism in Cotesia Glomerata Does Not Benefit the Host Plant By
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences (2012) 19, 65–71 King Saud University Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences www.ksu.edu.sa www.sciencedirect.com ORIGINAL ARTICLE Superparasitism in Cotesia glomerata does not benefit the host plant by reduction of herbivory caused by Pieris brassicae Fazil Hasan *, M. Shafiq Ansari Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India Received 4 October 2010; revised 25 October 2010; accepted 6 November 2010 Available online 16 November 2010 KEYWORDS Abstract Superparasitism occurs in Cotesia glomerata L. (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a gregarious Cotesia glomerata; endoparasitoid of Pieris spp. (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). The responses of Pieris brassicae L. larvae to Pieris brassicae; superparasitism were examined in order to elucidate the ecological significance of this behaviour. Superparasitism; Models of tritrophic interactions often imply that attraction of herbivore natural enemies by the plant Food consumption; constitutes a defence. Parasitoid attack on herbivores is assumed to result in a reduction in herbivory Plant fitness survivorship; and or an increase in plant fitness. Coupled with the active involvement of the plant in producing sig- Oviposition; nals, this can be seen as an indirect mediation of wound induced defence. The results show that super- Larval growth parasitism of P. brassicae by the parasitoid C. glomerata reduced survivorship but increased food consumption and weight growth in P. brassicae larvae. The duration of host larval development was found prolonged as the number of oviposition increased and superparasitized larvae (three to five time parasitized) grew slower than unparasitized larvae or larvae parasitized one or two times.
    [Show full text]
  • No Kin Discrimination in Female Mate Choice of a Parasitoid with Complementary Sex Determination
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by RERO DOC Digital Library Behavioral Ecology doi:10.1093/beheco/arq148 Advance Access publication 21 September 2010 No kin discrimination in female mate choice of a parasitoid with complementary sex determination Daniel Ruf, Dominique Mazzi, and Silvia Dorn Applied Entomology, Institute of Plant, Animal, and Agroecosystem Sciences, ETH Zurich, Schmelzbergstrasse 9, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland Discrimination against kin as mates, via genetic or environmentally derived cues of relatedness, can prevent inbreeding and thus enhance individual fitness and promote population survival. Sex in the parasitoid wasp Cotesia glomerata L. (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) is determined by one locus with multiple alleles, a mechanism termed single-locus complementary sex determina- tion (sl-CSD). Under sl-CSD, haploid individuals are males, whereas diploid individuals are females when heterozygous at the sex determination locus but males when homozygous. In species with sl-CSD, inbreeding leads to increased incidence of matings between individuals sharing an allele at the sex locus and thus to increased diploid male production. Diploid males cause an undesirable sex ratio distortion and can be of inferior fitness. To evade these deleterious effects, species with sl-CSD are expected to avoid inbreeding. We investigated whether C. glomerata females discriminate against close kin as mating partners. We per- formed a mate choice experiment, which allowed us to distinguish between kin discrimination based on the perception of phenotype-related cues and kin discrimination based on the perception of cues associated with the developmental environment. As kin discrimination is often mediated through cuticular hydrocarbons (CHCs), we additionally examined composition of the CHC profiles of males.
    [Show full text]
  • Attraction of the Larval Parasitoid Cotesia Glomerata to Pieris Brassicae Egg-Infested Black Mustard Plants
    WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY LABORATORY OF ENTOMOLOGY Attraction of the larval parasitoid Cotesia glomerata to Pieris brassicae egg-infested Black mustard plants No 010.16 Author: Eirini Vafia Plant Sciences Group; MPS Thesis ENT 80436 1st Supervisor: Nina Fatouros 2nd Supervisor: Ties Huigens Examiner: Marcel Dicke August 2010 1 Abstract Plants are threatened by various enemies. They can defend themselves against herbivore attack by direct defense mechanisms that negatively affect herbivores or by indirect defenses that attract natural enemies. A characteristic example of a direct defense response induced by eggs is shown in the black mustard Brassica nigra that develops a necrotic zone around the eggs of the Large cabbage White butterfly Pieris brassicae, i.e. the so called hypersensitive response (HR), which inhibits further egg development. B. nigra plants can also indirectly defend themselves against herbivorous attacks through natural enemies‟ attraction (i.e. by attracting the larval parasitoid wasp Cotesia glomerata to P. brassicae feeding caterpillars). The objective of this research was to investigate whether B. nigra volatiles induced by eggs of the Large cabbage White butterfly Pieris brassicae are exploited by C. glomerata for host location in order to be able to parasitize young caterpillars after hatching and whether those egg-induced volatiles are host specific. Interestingly, I discovered that C. glomerata wasps were significantly attracted to egg-induced plant volatiles 24 h after P. brassicae oviposition regardless of HR developemnt around the eggs, when tested against clean plants in two-choice tests conducted in the windtunnel. On the contrary, plants induced by 96 h-old P. brassicae eggs were attracted to the C.
    [Show full text]