DOCSLIB.ORG

A Tephritid Fly Mimics the Territorial Displays of Its Jumping Spider Predators

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Tephritid Fly Mimics the Territorial Displays of Its Jumping Spider Predators A Tephritid Fly Mimics the Territorial Displays of its Jumping Spider Predators Erick Greene; Larry J. Orsak; Douglas W. Whitman Science, New Series, Vol. 236, No. 4799. (Apr. 17, 1987), pp. 310-312. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0036-8075%2819870417%293%3A236%3A4799%3C310%3AATFMTT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U Science is currently published by American Association for the Advancement of Science. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/aaas.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org Wed Jan 16 17:10:06 2008 wings with a black felt-ti ped marker. Flies were marking, nor was their ability to flee spiders ham- precise details of these stereotyped behavior- first immobiid by ch&g them at -10°C for pered. about 30 seconds. 13. This spdy was sup rted an NSERC Canada 2 displays vary intraspe~ifica"~,salticid ago- 12. To determine that pen markine' on the wing do not o ranng grant to f?D.R.%e thank L. Dill, R. nistic displays generally commence with leg- directl cause increased modty, we maintained 20 &berg, and R. Smith for reviewing the manu- flies, ib of which we marked, within a Plexiglas script. We also thank L. Dill and B. Lalonde for waving (6). cage. Mean age at death for each group did not Mer advlce and B. Lalonde for photographs. To test the effect of the wing pattern and Mann-Whimey U test). Further, 0bse~ationScon- 6,ed that flies did not behave diferently after 20 October 1986; accepted 11 Febv1987 the wing-waving display on the behavior of jumping spiders and other potential preda- tors, we transplanted wings between house flies (Mwca domestics) and Zmsmaflies (7). House fly wings are the same general A Tephritid Fly Mimics the Territorial Displays of Its size and shape as Zonaremata wings, but they lack pattern. After this operation, the flies Jumping Spider Predators retained complete movement of their wings, and could display and fly normally (Fig. 1B). Behavioral trials between jumping spiders The tephritid fly Zmmemuta vittigera (Cquillett) has a leg-like pattern on its wings and flies were conducted for 5 minutes in a and a wing-waving display that together mimic the agonistic territorial displays of glass-topped arena (8). Jumping spiders jumping spiders (Salticidae). Zmmemuta flies initiate this display when stalked by were collected on or around Zmsemata jumping spiders, causing the spiders to display back and retreat. Wing transplant host plant (silver leaf nightshade, Solanum experiments showed that both the wing pattern and wing-waving displays are elaegnifolium). Twenty jumping spiders necessary for effective mimicry: Zmsemuta flies with transplanted house fly wings and representing 11 species (9) were each pre- house flies with transplanted Zmsemuta wings were attacked by jumping spiders. sented with five treatments: normal Zonose- Similar experiments showed that this mimicry does not protect Zotwsemuta against mata, Zmsemata with other Zonusemata nonsalticid predators. This is a novel form of sign stimulus mimicry that may occur wings (sham operation), Zonusemata with more generally. house fly wings, house flies with Zonosemata wings, and normal house flies. Each spider OST FORMS OF MIMICRY, SUCH Many flies have dark wing markings and was presented with these treatments in a as cryptic coloration or Batesian wing-flicking displays, so Zunosemata might random order. All jumping spiders were M and Miillerian systems, confer fortuitously resemble jumping spiders, but hungry when tested: they were given water protection against a wide array of predators not gain protection from predators by these but no food for 2 days before the trial. (1). We describe a novel form of mimicry in features. If Zunosemata is in fact a jumping Individual spiders were never tested more which an organism mimics its major preda- spider mimic, it is not clear what types of than twice in one day. tor and thereby reduces the risk of being predators are deterred. Since salticids are The wing pattern had a profound effect eaten by it. A tephritid fly, by mimicking the quick and have a poisonous bite, it has been upon jumping spider behavior (Fig. 2). stereotyped aggressive behavior of one fam- suggested that a salticid mimic may be Normal Zonosemata and the sham-operated ily of spiders, can escape from spiders of this shunned by many vertebrate and arthropod control flies were attacked or killed less family but not from other predators. predators (3). fiequently than flies in the three remaining The fly Zmsemata vieera (Diptera: Another possibility, which had not been treatments (10). There was no smtisticallv Tephritidae) is purported to mimic jumping suggested, is that Zmsemata displays may significant diffeknce in the jumping spider;' spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) (2, 3). Both specifically mimic salticid territorial displays, responses to the normal Zonosemata flies and sexes have dark wing bands, which resemble and be effective only against salticid preda- thi sham-operated control flies (homogene- spider legs, and false eyespots on the end of tors (4). Many salticids defend "privacy ity test, G = 3.28, P > 0.1), indicating that the abdomen. When disturbed, these flies spheresyyaround themselves. Wheri two the operation itself did not affect spider hold their wings perpendicular to the body meet they usually initially perform agonistic responses. Jumping spiders began stalking and wave them up and down (Fig. 1A); this displays (which may turn into courtship these flies within seconds after the trial resembles the agonistic leg-waving behavior displays depending upon sex and species) began. When the spider approached to with- typical of the jumping spiders. However, (5). These displays can be performed by in about 5 cm, Zonosma flies usually there have been no experimental demonstra- juveniles and adults of both sexes and occur began a vigorous wing-waving display. tions that Zmsemata is a spider mimic. within and between species. Although the response, the jumping spiders abruptly stopped stalking and waved their legs at the flies. The flies backed away in a zigzag fashion while waving their wings and flew off. Most jumping spiders made no further stalking attempts during the remaining 5 minutes. Jumping spiders were repelled from both the front and back of the flies. In E. Gmne, De amnent of Biology, Princeton Universi- ty, Princeton, b08544. L. J. Orsak, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Flg. 1. (A)A female Zmnnata vitt&cra beginning its wing-waving display toward a stalking jumping Athens, GA 30602. D. W. Whirman, Insect Biol and Population Man- spider (Phidippw qacheanw). The jumping spider stopped stalking, waved its legs at the fly, and then agement Research LaboratoV~.s.Dqamnent of retreated. (B) A Zaosnnata a'tt&cra fly with transplanted house fly wings. Such flies can display "culture, Agricultural R-ch Service, P.O. Box 7%; normally and fly. Tifton, GA 31793. SCIENCE, VOL. 236 A B C D E and normal house flics). Of particular intcr- Table 1.Capture times for three fly treatments by est, Zonosernata with house fly wings dis- potential predators of Zonosemata. The fly treat- ment symbols arc the same as for Fig. 2. For each played identically to normal Zonosenzata predator there is no statistically significant differ- flies, but this never elicited the leg-waving ence between treatment medians (painvise Mann- displays from spiders, and all but one were Whitney U tcsts, all Ps > 0.05). attacked or killed. House flies with Zonose- Median nzata wings held the wings flat over their Fly Range capture treat- ple (scc- bodies: the pattern was not visible to spi- time ment onds) ders, which never displayed toward these (n) (seconds) flies. To determine if these displays also pro- Nonsalticid spzder Oxyopes salt~cus A 10 80 16-207 tected Zonosernata flics against other potcn- 6: 10 77 32-149 tial prcdators, we performed similar expcri- E 10 56 32-292 mcnts using nonsalticid spiders (Oxyopes sal- ticus), mantids (Mantis rel&iosa), assassin Assassin bufi Pselliopus zebra bugs (Pselliopus zebra), and whiptail lizards A 8 234 39-632 C 8 309 52-889 (Cnernidophorous uniparens; Arizona Re- E 8 162 34-736 search Permit 089). All predators wcre caught on or around the host plant of Mantis Mantis rcligiosa Zonosernata. These predators were presented A 12 88 29-435 C 12 64 11-215 Fig. 2. Behavioral responses of jumping spidcrs to with three fly treatments (A, C, and E of E 12 94 41-341 fly presentations. The response is the highest level Fig. 2). The same testing protocol was used of aggression attained during 5 minutes of behav- except that the test chamber sizes were Wh$tail liza~dCnemidophorous uniparens ioral interaction in a test arena.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hot Peppers As a Host for the Mexican Fruit Fly Anastrepha Ludens (Diptera: Tephritidae)
    Scientific Notes 603 HOT PEPPERS AS A HOST FOR THE MEXICAN FRUIT FLY ANASTREPHA LUDENS (DIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE) DONALD B. THOMAS United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service Kika de la Garza Subtropical Agricultural Research Center, 2413 E. Hwy 83, Weslaco, TX 78596 On the 28th of April, 2003, a shipment of man- will breed in rotting vegetable matter including zano chile peppers (Capsicum pubescens Ruis & chile peppers, but these are non-pest species, and Pavon cv Rocoto) entering the United States at this incident involved sound fruit (Fig. 1). No Pharr, Texas, was found to be infested with insect dipterans are listed as economic pests of chile pep- larvae. USDA inspectors first noted maggots pers by English & Lewis (2004). Baker et al. crawling in the bed of the truck underneath the 16 (1944) cited incidents of A. ludens in “bell peppers cardboard boxes (240 Kg) containing the chile pep- and chili peppers” and there are equally ambigu- pers. Further inspection confirmed that the larvae ous reports of another tephritid, Zonosemata vitti- were in, and emerging from, the fleshy pods. Two gera (Coquillet), taken in “peppers” (Cole 1969). of the larvae were immediately preserved in alco- Zonosemata electa (Say) is known as the “pepper hol while 50 more larvae were kept alive. All spec- maggot” (Peterson 1960) and has been reared imens were hand carried to the nearby USDA- from “Capsicum annuum L.” (Smith & Bush ARS laboratory in Weslaco, Texas for identifica- 1999). The latter solanaceous plant species in- tion. Microscopic examination established that cludes both hot and sweet peppers.
    [Show full text]
  • Flies) Benjamin Kongyeli Badii
    Chapter Phylogeny and Functional Morphology of Diptera (Flies) Benjamin Kongyeli Badii Abstract The order Diptera includes all true flies. Members of this order are the most ecologically diverse and probably have a greater economic impact on humans than any other group of insects. The application of explicit methods of phylogenetic and morphological analysis has revealed weaknesses in the traditional classification of dipteran insects, but little progress has been made to achieve a robust, stable clas- sification that reflects evolutionary relationships and morphological adaptations for a more precise understanding of their developmental biology and behavioral ecol- ogy. The current status of Diptera phylogenetics is reviewed in this chapter. Also, key aspects of the morphology of the different life stages of the flies, particularly characters useful for taxonomic purposes and for an understanding of the group’s biology have been described with an emphasis on newer contributions and progress in understanding this important group of insects. Keywords: Tephritoidea, Diptera flies, Nematocera, Brachycera metamorphosis, larva 1. Introduction Phylogeny refers to the evolutionary history of a taxonomic group of organisms. Phylogeny is essential in understanding the biodiversity, genetics, evolution, and ecology among groups of organisms [1, 2]. Functional morphology involves the study of the relationships between the structure of an organism and the function of the various parts of an organism. The old adage “form follows function” is a guiding principle of functional morphology. It helps in understanding the ways in which body structures can be used to produce a wide variety of different behaviors, including moving, feeding, fighting, and reproducing. It thus, integrates concepts from physiology, evolution, anatomy and development, and synthesizes the diverse ways that biological and physical factors interact in the lives of organisms [3].
    [Show full text]
  • Factors Regulating the Population Dynamics and Damage Potential of Pollen Beetle (Meligethes Aeneus F.) on Crops of Oilseed Rape
    Factors regulating the population dynamics and damage potential of pollen beetle (Meligethes aeneus F.) on crops of oilseed rape Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Fakultät für Agrarwissenschaften der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen vorgelegt von Marie-Luise Tölle geboren in Gifhorn Göttingen, Mai 2014 D 7 1. Referentin/Referent: Prof. Dr. Stefan Vidal 2. Korreferentin/Korreferent: Prof. Dr. Andreas von Tiedemann Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 12.05.2011 Contents Table of contents page Chapter I General introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 The pest: Meligethes aeneus ............................................................................................. 2 Factors influencing the population dynamics of pollen beetle ............................................ 3 Possible effects of insecticides on population growth and damage of pollen beetle ........... 4 Parasitoids and parasitisation of pollen beetle ................................................................... 5 Trap cropping in oilseed rape ............................................................................................ 6 References ........................................................................................................................ 7 Chapter II Cultivar and phenology of winter oilseed rape affect the abundance and reproduction of Meligethes aeneus (Fabricius) ......................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Pepper Pest Management
    Pepper Pest Management Kaushalya Amarasekare Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Entomology Dept. of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences College of Agriculture Tennessee State University University of Maryland Nashville, Tennessee Extension snaped.fns.usda.gov Goal The goal of this training is to educate stakeholders on arthropods (pest insects and mites) that damage peppers and methods to manage them using integrated pest management (IPM) techniques Objectives Upon completion of this training, the participants will be able to 1) teach, 2) demonstrate and 3) guide growers, small farmers, backyard and community gardeners, master gardeners, and other stakeholders on management of pest arthropods in peppers Course Outline 1. Introduction: background information on bell and chili pepper 2. Pests of pepper a) Seedling Pests b) Foliage Feeders c) Pod Feeders 3. Summary 4. References Introduction Bell /sweet pepper Peppers • Family Solanaceae • Capsicum annum L. • Bell/sweet peppers and chili agmrc.org Peppers: consumed as • Fresh • Dried chili pepper • Ground as spices • Processed (canned, pickled, brined or in salsas) 570cjk, Creative Commons wifss.ucdavis.edu Bell Pepper • 2017: U.S. consumption of fresh bell peppers ~ 11.4 lbs./person • High in vitamin C and dietary fiber • Provide small amounts of several vitamins and minerals • Usually sold as fresh produce Maturity Sugar Content Chili Pepper • 2017: U.S. consumption of chili peppers ~ 7.7 lbs./person • High in vitamin C • Small amounts of vitamin A and B-6, iron and magnesium 570cjk, Creative Commons wifss.ucdavis.edu • Sold as fresh produce and dried (whole peppers, crushed or powdered) pepperscale.com Myscha Theriault U.S. green pepper production • U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Enemies of True Fruit Flies 02/2004-01 PPQ Jeffrey N
    United States Department of Agriculture Natural Enemies of Marketing and Regulatory True Fruit Flies Programs Animal and Plant Health (Tephritidae) Inspection Service Plant Protection Jeffrey N. L. Stibick and Quarantine Psyttalia fletcheri (shown) is the only fruit fly parasitoid introduced into Hawaii capable of parasitizing the melon fly (Bactrocera cucurbitae) United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Plant Protection and Quarantine 4700 River Road Riverdale, MD 20737 February, 2004 Telephone: (301) 734-4406 FAX: (301) 734-8192 e-mail: [email protected] Jeffrey N. L. Stibick Introduction Introduction Fruit flies in the family Tephritidae are high profile insects among commercial fruit and vegetable growers, marketing exporters, government regulatory agencies, and the scientific community. Locally, producers face huge losses without some management scheme to control fruit fly populations. At the national and international level, plant protection agencies strictly regulate the movement of potentially infested products. Consumers throughout the world demand high quality, blemish-free produce. Partly to satisfy these demands, the costs to local, state and national governments are quite high and increasing as world trade, and thus risk, increases. Thus, fruit flies impose a considerable resource tax on participants at every level, from producer to shipper to the importing state and, ultimately, to the consumer. (McPheron & Steck, 1996) Indeed, in the United States alone, the running costs per year to APHIS, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), (the federal Agency responsible) for maintenance of trapping systems, laboratories, and identification are in excess of US$27 million per year and increasing. This figure only accounts for a fraction of total costs throughout the country, as State, County and local governments put in their share as well as the local industry affected.
    [Show full text]
  • Pepper Maggot (Order: Diptera, Family: Tephritidae, Zonosemata Electa (Say))
    Pepper maggot (Order: Diptera, Family: Tephritidae, Zonosemata electa (Say)) Description: Adult: Male flies are about 6.5 mm long and females about 7.5 mm. The head, abdomen and legs are pale yellow. The thorax is bright yellow with brownish stripes. The last abdominal segment has a pair of small black spots. The transparent wings have dark bands, with the bands forming a ‘V’ shape near the wing tips. The eyes are green. Immature stages: Eggs are primarily oval but with one end narrowed, tapered, and curved, with an overall shape similar to a crooked-neck squash. Larvae reach a maximum length Pepper maggot adult on left compared to house fly of about 12 mm and are shaped similar to a house fly larvae, on right (Image from NCSU). with a cylindrical body that is wide at the posterior end and tapers to a pointed head. Larval color changes from white to yellowish as it matures. The pupal stage occurs in the soil. Pupae are yellowish-brown to brown, oval, flattened and 6-8 mm long. Biology: Life cycle: There is one generation of pepper maggot each year. Females emerge, mate, and lay eggs in June-July (possibly a little earlier in Georgia). They insert eggs into the flesh of fruit. The stalk of the egg may be visible with close examination of the oviposition slit. Eggs hatch in 8-10 days. The larvae feed inside the fruit for about 18 days, then exit the fruit, drop to the soil and pupate, usually within the top 5- 10 cm of soil.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Pepper Maggots with OMRI-Approved GF-120 Fruit Fly Bait T
    Managing Pepper Maggots with OMRI-Approved GF-120 Fruit Fly Bait T. Jude Boucher, University of Connecticut 24 Hyde Ave., Vernon, CT 06066 [email protected], 860-875-3331 The pepper maggot (PM), Zonosemata electa, is a Tephritid fruit fly native to horsenettle in North America, which first attacked peppers and eggplant in 1921. It has a patchy distribution throughout its range, which includes the eastern United States and Ontario, but also extends west to Kansas and south to Texas and Florida. In New England, it is quite common in the CT River Valley and along the shore in CT, MA and RI, and has been found as far north as Epping, NH. This pest has a single generation each year. The adult flies emerge from the soil in early to mid- July over a 10- to 14-day period. Males emerge up to 7 days before females. Each female can lay up to 50 eggs, beginning 6 to 7 days after mating. Eggs take 10 to 12 days to hatch. Mating is thought to occur exclusively on the host plant and fruit, where males will fight for territory to win a receptive female. However, the flies spend much of their time feeding in and inhabiting nearby trees, returning to the crop fields during daylight hours for mating and egg laying. Over 94% of egg laying occurs in the first 4 weeks after emergence. The flies may live through mid- to late August if not controlled. Fully grown maggots emerge from the fruit in late August or early September, and enter the soil to pass the winter as pupae.
    [Show full text]
  • Increasing Coffee Berry Borer Female Density in Artificial Diet Decreases
    ECOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR Increasing Coffee Berry Borer (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) Female Density in Artificial Diet Decreases Fecundity 1 2 3,4 FERNANDO E. VEGA, MATTHEW KRAMER, AND JULIANA JARAMILLO J. Econ. Entomol. 104(1): 87Ð93 (2011); DOI: 10.1603/EC10353 ABSTRACT Three experiments were conducted to determine the inßuence of number of coffee berry borer, Hypothenemus hampei (Ferrari) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae), females (one, two, or Þve) reared in artiÞcial diet on fecundity and subsequent development of larvae, pupae, and adults. Our results demonstrated that increasing female density from one to two or Þve individuals did not result in the expected two- or Þve-fold increase in progeny, despite ample food resources available. Instead, decreased fecundity was observed with increasing density for all experiments. The mechanism reducing fecundity was not identiÞed, but possibly, volatiles are being produced (e.g., host-marking pheromones). The decrease in fecundity may explain why infestations of only one colonizing female per berry are the norm in the Þeld. KEY WORDS artiÞcial rearing, bark beetles, Hypothenemus hampei, host-marking pheromones The coffee berry borer, Hypothenemus hampei (Fer- holes) will attack a single berry and the damage is rari) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae), is the much accelerated.” One might argue that the number most devastating insect pest of coffee (Coffea arabica of coffee berries in a coffee plantation is not a limiting L. and Coffea canephora Pierre ex Froehner) world- resource, and that this abundance explains the lack of wide and has now been reported in most coffee-pro- multiple infestations per berry; i.e., with many berries ducing countries (Vega 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • FRUIT FLY GENERA SOUTH of the UNITED STATES (Diptera: Tephritidae)
    1.0 1/11/2.5 2.2 1.1 1.1 111111.25 11111 1.4 111111.6 11111 1.25 111111.4 111111.6 MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS-1963-A NATIDNAL BUREAU OF STANDAROS-1963-A i 6~~ ~_. - (; ~> I' \, ," '" <> Q -i'. .D « 0" ',' '" p P 'J -:. y~.' /'.',,": :$, ,/ -l,; .C ~ r;;;:. ';. ,~ .., .. , {~ 0 , FRUIT FLY GENERA SOLJTH OF TH E UNITED STATES (Diptera: Tephritidae) by RICHARD H. FOOTE F\ UNITED STATES TECHNICAL PREPARED BY I\U.~), DEPARTMENT OF BULLETIN SCIENCE AND ~ AGRICULTURE NUMBER 1600 EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION ABSTRACT Foote, Richard H. 1980. Fruit fly genera south of the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin 1600,79 pp. The 88 genera of fruit flies in Mexico, Central America, the West Indies, and South America are discussed. Keys to all genera are pre­ sented, and a synonymy, diagnosis, and discussion of each genus follow. Included for each genus is information about its distribution, its rela­ tionship to other genera, its composition in terms of the species belong­ ingto it, aids to its recognition, and references for identifying its species. Several diagnostic characteristics and the wing of at least one species in almost every genus have been illustrated. Four genera, previously re­ garded as valid, have been synonymized with others, and three addi­ tional genera, long recorded from the region, are shown not to occur in the New World or to belong to other fly families. Fruit flies comprise the most economically important family of plant-inhabiting Diptera, consid­ ering the potential for agricultu"'al damage by species of such genera as Anast-repha, Ceratitis, Dacu.s, andRhagoletis.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Jumping Spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) Draw Their Own Portraits?
    Peckhamia 179.1 Self portraits by jumping spiders 1 PECKHAMIA 179.1, 6 February 2019, 1―14 ISSN 2161―8526 (print) urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6116EC94-2146-49D9-8FDE-F11833CFA03D (registered 31 JAN 2019) ISSN 1944―8120 (online) Do jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) draw their own portraits? David E. Hill,1 Abhijith A. P. C.2 and João P. Burini 3 1 213 Wild Horse Creek Drive, Simpsonville SC 29680, USA, email [email protected] 2 Indraprastha Organic Farm, Kalalwadi Village, Udboor Post, Mysuru-570008, Karnataka, India, email abhiapc@ gmail.com 3 São Paulo, Brazil, email [email protected] Abstract. Many different insects appear to mimic the appearance of the salticid spiders as viewed from the front. Examples of this mimicry are reviewed with respect to the hypothesis that these are examples of predator mimicry, whereby salticid spiders are less likely to attack prey that present images of other salticid spiders. Key words. Anastrepha, Batesian mimicry, Blattodea, Brenthia, Brixia, Ceratitis, Choreutis, Chrysops, Cixiidae, Derbidae, Fulgoroidea, Glyphipterigidae, Glyphipterix, Goniurella, Graphopsocus, Leptoceridae, metalmark moths, Mimarachne, mimicry, Nectopsyche, Olethreutes, Phidippus, Platensina, Plexippus, predator mimicry, Procecidochares, Psocoptera, Rhagoletis, Rhotana, Rhotanini, Saltissus, Stenopsocidae, Tabanidae, Tephritidae, Tortricidae, Trichoptera, Tritoxa, Trupanea, Zonosemata Many insects display an image that suggests the appearance of a salticid spider as viewed from the front. In some cases this display also includes movement suggestive of the aggressive or agonistic displays of these spiders (e.g., Lim & Li 2004; Hill 2018). Here we review a series of examples that may represent predator mimicry, or the mimicry of predators, in this case salticid spiders, by their prey.
    [Show full text]
  • The Host Marking Pheromone Application on the Management of Fruit Flies - a Review
    835 Vol.55, n. 6: pp.835-842, November-December 2012 BRAZILIAN ARCHIVES OF ISSN 1516-8913 Printed in Brazil BIOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGY AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL The Host Marking Pheromone Application on the Management of Fruit Flies - A Review Márcio Alves Silva 1,2 * Gerane Celly Dias Bezerra-Silva 2and Thiago Mastrangelo 3 1Universidade Estadual do Piauí; 64860-000; Uruçuí - PI - Brasil. 2Departamento de Entomologia e Acarologia; Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz; Universidade de São Paulo; CP:. 9; 13418-900; Piracicaba - SP - Brasil. 3Centro de Energia Nuclear na Agricultura; Universidade de São Paulo; CP:. 96, 13400-970; Piracicaba – SP - Brasil ABSTRACT The aim of this work was to review the role of the host marking pheromone (HMP) and its application in integrated management programs for the fruit flies. Initially the oviposition behavior of tephritids has been analyzed with emphasis on Ceratitis capitata . The deposition of HMP, which consists in the last stage of the oviposition behavior has been characterized and discussed about evolutive aspects and the biological meaning of the tephritidae communication through the HMP. Finally, the perspectives on the use of HMP in the integrated management of fruit flies have been discussed. Key words: Oviposition behavior, host marking pheromone, oviposition deterring pheromone, IPM, fruit flies INTRODUCTION of “decisions”, which are taken as they cumulate information about the potential host (Prokopy and The fruit flies (FF) belong to the Diptera order Roitberg 1989; Fletcher and Prokopy 1991; Díaz- (which has later wings transformed in halteres), Fleischer et al. 2000; Sugayama and Malavasi, Brachycera suborder (with short antenna, usually 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology and Management of Economically Important Fruit Flies
    53 IQ Ecology and Management of Economically Important Fruit Flies Report 830 y 1988 Agricultural E rimen Oregon State Urtiverst PURCHASE OF THIS PUBLICATION: Individual copies of Ecology and Management of Economically Important FruitTlies may be purchased for $11.95 from: Department of Entomology Oregon State University Corvallis, OR 97331 ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF ECONOMICALLY IMPORTANT FRUIT FLIES Edited By: M. T. AliNiazee Department of Entomology Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon 97331 U. S. A. CONTRIBUTORS M. T. AliNiazee R. V. Dowell Department of Entomology California Dept. of Food Oregon State University & Agriculture, 1220 N. Street Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Sacramento, California 95814 T. Beirbaum W. C. Mitchell Department of Zoology Department of Entomology Michigan State University University of Hawaii East Lansing, Michigan 48824 Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 G. L. Bush W. H. Reissig Department of Entomology Department of Entomology Michigan State University Cornell University East Lansing, Michigan 48824 Geneva, New York 14456 R. Clark H. Weems, Jr. Division of Plant Industry Division of Plant Industry Florida Dept. of Agriculture Florida Dept. of Agriculture Gainesville, Florida 32604 Gainesville, Floria 32602 PREFACE This volume is a proceeding of the papers presented in an "Informal Conference" during the Annual Meetings of the Entomological Society of America held on December 8, 1985, in Hollywood, Florida. Although most of the papers presented during the conference are included in this publication, there were three additional papers which are not presented here since they have been published elsewhere. Our goal was to bring together leading scientists from North America working on Tephritid fruit flies to present a progress report on their respective research and provide a general overview of the subject.
    [Show full text]