DOCSLIB.ORG

Sensilla Morphology and Complex Expression Pattern of Odorant Binding Proteins in the Vetch Aphid Megoura Viciae (Hemiptera: Aphididae)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sensilla Morphology and Complex Expression Pattern of Odorant Binding Proteins in the Vetch Aphid Megoura Viciae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) fphys-09-00777 June 25, 2018 Time: 11:57 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 25 June 2018 doi: 10.3389/fphys.2018.00777 Sensilla Morphology and Complex Expression Pattern of Odorant Binding Proteins in the Vetch Aphid Megoura viciae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) Daniele Bruno1†, Gerarda Grossi2†, Rosanna Salvia2†, Andrea Scala2†, Donatella Farina2, Annalisa Grimaldi1, Jing-Jiang Zhou3, Sabino A. Bufo2, Heiko Vogel4, Ewald Grosse-Wilde5*, Bill S. Hansson5 and Patrizia Falabella2* 1 Department of Biotechnology and Life Sciences, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy, 2 Department of Sciences, University of Basilicata, Potenza, Italy, 3 Department of Biological Chemistry and Crop Protection, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, United Kingdom, 4 Department of Entomology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Jena, Germany, 5 Department of Edited by: Evolutionary Neuroethology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Jena, Germany Nicolas Durand, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, France Chemoreception in insects is mediated by several components interacting at Reviewed by: different levels and including odorant-binding proteins (OBPs). Although recent studies Andrew Dacks, demonstrate that the function of OBPs cannot be restricted to an exclusively olfactory West Virginia University, United States Julian Chen, role, and that OBPs have been found also in organs generally not related to Institute of Plant Protection (CAS), chemoreception, their feature of binding molecules remains undisputed. Studying China the vetch aphid Megoura viciae (Buckton), we used a transcriptomic approach to *Correspondence: Ewald Grosse-Wilde identify ten OBPs in the antennae and we examined the ultrastructural morphology [email protected] of sensilla and their distribution on the antennae, legs, mouthparts and cauda of Patrizia Falabella wingless and winged adults by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Three types [email protected] of sensilla, trichoid, coeloconic and placoid, differently localized and distributed on †These authors have contributed equally to this work. antennae, mouthparts, legs and cauda, were described. The expression analysis of the ten OBPs was performed by RT-qPCR in the antennae and other body parts of Specialty section: This article was submitted to the wingless adults and at different developmental stages and morphs. Five of the Invertebrate Physiology, ten OBPs (MvicOBP1, MvicOBP3, MvicOBP6, MvicOBP7, and MvicOBP8), whose a section of the journal antibodies were already available, were selected for experiments of whole-mount Frontiers in Physiology immunolocalization on antennae, mouthparts, cornicles and cauda of adult aphids. Most Received: 19 December 2017 Accepted: 04 June 2018 of the ten OBPs were more expressed in antennae than in other body parts; MvicOBP1, Published: 25 June 2018 MvicOBP3, MvicOBP6, MvicOBP7 were also immunolocalized in the sensilla on the Citation: antennae, suggesting a possible involvement of these proteins in chemoreception. Bruno D, Grossi G, Salvia R, Scala A, Farina D, Grimaldi A, Zhou J-J, MvicOBP6, MvicOBP7, MvicOBP8, MvicOBP9 were highly expressed in the heads Bufo SA, Vogel H, Grosse-Wilde E, and three of them (MvicOBP6, MvicOBP7, MvicOBP8) were immunolocalized in the Hansson BS and Falabella P (2018) sensilla on the mouthparts, supporting the hypothesis that also mouthparts may be Sensilla Morphology and Complex Expression Pattern of Odorant involved in chemoreception. MvicOBP2, MvicOBP3, MvicOBP5, MvicOBP8 were highly Binding Proteins in the Vetch Aphid expressed in the cornicles-cauda and two of them (MvicOBP3, MvicOBP8) were Megoura viciae (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Front. Physiol. 9:777. immunolocalized in cornicles and in cauda, suggesting a possible new function not doi: 10.3389/fphys.2018.00777 related to chemoreception. Moreover, the response of M. viciae to different components Frontiers in Physiology| www.frontiersin.org 1 June 2018| Volume 9| Article 777 fphys-09-00777 June 25, 2018 Time: 11:57 # 2 Bruno et al. Megoura viciae Odorant Binding Proteins of the alarm pheromone was assessed by behavioral assays on wingless adult morph; (−)-a-pinene and (C)-limonene were found to be the components mainly eliciting an alarm response. Taken together, our results represent a road map for subsequent in- depth analyses of the OBPs involved in several physiological functions in M. viciae, including chemoreception. Keywords: vetch aphid, chemoreception, odorant-binding proteins, RT-qPCR, immunolocalization, behavioral assays INTRODUCTION only basiconic sensilla contain pore tubules (Shanbhag et al., 2000), the authors do not exclude that OBP28a expressed in Chemical perception in insects is known to be mediated by other sensilla type may play different roles including the classical molecules belonging to the classes of olfactory, gustatory and function of odorants carrier (Larter et al., 2016). ionotropic receptors and to the classes of soluble olfactory Alternatively, different studies suggest that a sensible proteins, odorant-binding proteins (OBPs) and chemosensory reduction in olfactory function is related to the reduced levels of proteins (CSPs); however, what these proteins do and how they certain OBPs (Xu et al., 2005; Biessmann et al., 2010; Pelletier interact is still not completely clear (Fan et al., 2010; Leal, et al., 2010; Swarup et al., 2011). Within the processes relying 2013; Pelosi et al., 2017). In particular, OBPs have long been on chemoreception, it has been proposed that OBPs also play a thought to act exclusively as carriers of chemicals that, once role in removing chemicals, both those bound to the ORs and solubilized, were transported to the olfactory receptors (Pelosi those located in the sensory lymph, in order to speed up nervous et al., 2006; Brito et al., 2016). The generally hydrophobic stimulus termination (Vogt and Riddiford, 1981; Ziegelberger, odorants need to reach the specific receptors bound to the 1995). That the role of OBPs is related to their binding task plasma membrane of sensory neuron dendrites, overcoming the is apparent from their multifunctional features, which are not hydrophilic barrier that is the sensillar lymph (Pelosi, 1996; confined to chemical perception (Smartt and Erickson, 2009; Jeong et al., 2013). Several studies performed in vivo indicate Sun Y.L. et al., 2012; Ishida et al., 2013; Pelosi et al., 2017). that OBPs play a key role in chemoreception. RNAi was used Indeed, OBPs are expressed in organs that are not connected to reduce the expression of OBPs in Anopheles gambiae and to chemoreception. In some cases, the same OBP is expressed Culex quinquefasciatus (Biessmann et al., 2010; Pelletier et al., in chemoreceptive and non-chemoreceptive tissues, suggesting 2010), in Drosophila melanogaster (Swarup et al., 2011) and in that one type may have multiple roles (Calvello et al., 2003; Li Acyrthosiphon pisum (Zhang et al., 2017). Results demonstrated et al., 2008; Sirot et al., 2008; Vogel et al., 2010; Dani et al., 2011; that OBPs play a specific role in olfactory perception, suggesting Iovinella et al., 2011; Sun Y.L. et al., 2012; De Biasio et al., 2015). there is a direct correlation between the expression level of For example, since the same OBPs are expressed in antennae and OBPs and the ability of insects to perceive odors. Previous reproductive organs (Sun Y.L. et al., 2012; Ban et al., 2013), or studies found that Drosophila OBP76a (LUSH) mutants, played in antennae and in pheromone glands (Jacquin-Joly et al., 2001; an essential role in binding and mediating the recognition of the Strandh et al., 2009; Gu et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2013, 2015; sex pheromone 11-cis-vaccenyl acetate (c-VA) (Xu et al., 2005; Xia et al., 2015), they may both mediate the recognition of and Ha and Smith, 2006; Laughlin et al., 2008). These preliminary assisting with the release of the same chemical message. In both results should be partially reconsidered in light of more recent cases, the role of OBPs is to solubilize hydrophobic pheromones, research demonstrating that, at sufficiently high concentrations, binding them in a hydrophilic environment where OBPs are c-VA is able to activate neuronal stimuli without LUSH (Gomez- present in high concentration (Nagnan-Le Meillour et al., 2000; Diaz et al., 2013; Li et al., 2014). However, LUSH is still considered Jacquin-Joly et al., 2001; Pelosi et al., 2017). a protein that can increase the sensitivity of the c-VA receptor, The different functions imputed to OBPs are in any case also protecting pheromone molecules from degradation by ODEs linked to the ability of these proteins to bind small hydrophobic (Gomez-Diaz et al., 2013). Moreover, the capability of LUSH to molecules, signals of different types originating from different bind c-VA has been further demonstrated by in vitro experiments sources. However, the expression of soluble olfactory proteins (Kruse et al., 2003). in chemosensory structures (mainly antennae and mouthparts) It has been demonstrated that deleting OBP28a in Drosophila indicates that they play a role in chemoreception (Pelosi et al., melanogaster basiconic sensilla did not reduce the insect’s 2017). ability to respond to olfactory stimuli (Larter et al., 2016), Chemoreception is just one of the roles that OBPs play suggesting that OBP28a is not required for odorant transport. in aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae), a group of insects that Larter and colleagues hypothesize a novel role for OBP, namely, includes major crop pest in the world. Aphids cause damage that it modulates
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Insecticides - Development of Safer and More Effective Technologies
    INSECTICIDES - DEVELOPMENT OF SAFER AND MORE EFFECTIVE TECHNOLOGIES Edited by Stanislav Trdan Insecticides - Development of Safer and More Effective Technologies http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/3356 Edited by Stanislav Trdan Contributors Mahdi Banaee, Philip Koehler, Alexa Alexander, Francisco Sánchez-Bayo, Juliana Cristina Dos Santos, Ronald Zanetti Bonetti Filho, Denilson Ferrreira De Oliveira, Giovanna Gajo, Dejane Santos Alves, Stuart Reitz, Yulin Gao, Zhongren Lei, Christopher Fettig, Donald Grosman, A. Steven Munson, Nabil El-Wakeil, Nawal Gaafar, Ahmed Ahmed Sallam, Christa Volkmar, Elias Papadopoulos, Mauro Prato, Giuliana Giribaldi, Manuela Polimeni, Žiga Laznik, Stanislav Trdan, Shehata E. M. Shalaby, Gehan Abdou, Andreia Almeida, Francisco Amaral Villela, João Carlos Nunes, Geri Eduardo Meneghello, Adilson Jauer, Moacir Rossi Forim, Bruno Perlatti, Patrícia Luísa Bergo, Maria Fátima Da Silva, João Fernandes, Christian Nansen, Solange Maria De França, Mariana Breda, César Badji, José Vargas Oliveira, Gleberson Guillen Piccinin, Alan Augusto Donel, Alessandro Braccini, Gabriel Loli Bazo, Keila Regina Hossa Regina Hossa, Fernanda Brunetta Godinho Brunetta Godinho, Lilian Gomes De Moraes Dan, Maria Lourdes Aldana Madrid, Maria Isabel Silveira, Fabiola-Gabriela Zuno-Floriano, Guillermo Rodríguez-Olibarría, Patrick Kareru, Zachaeus Kipkorir Rotich, Esther Wamaitha Maina, Taema Imo Published by InTech Janeza Trdine 9, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia Copyright © 2013 InTech All chapters are Open Access distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license, which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles even for commercial purposes, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. After this work has been published by InTech, authors have the right to republish it, in whole or part, in any publication of which they are the author, and to make other personal use of the work.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mechanism by Which Aphids Adhere to Smooth Surfaces
    J. exp. Biol. 152, 243-253 (1990) 243 Printed in Great Britain © The Company of Biologists Limited 1990 THE MECHANISM BY WHICH APHIDS ADHERE TO SMOOTH SURFACES BY A. F. G. DIXON, P. C. CROGHAN AND R. P. GOWING School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ Accepted 30 April 1990 Summary 1. The adhesive force acting between the adhesive organs and substratum for a number of aphid species has been studied. In the case of Aphis fabae, the force per foot is about 10/iN. This is much the same on both glass (amphiphilic) and silanized glass (hydrophobic) surfaces. The adhesive force is about 20 times greater than the gravitational force tending to detach each foot of an inverted aphid. 2. The mechanism of adhesion was considered. Direct van der Waals forces and viscous force were shown to be trivial and electrostatic force and muscular force were shown to be improbable. An adhesive force resulting from surface tension at an air-fluid interface was shown to be adequate and likely. 3. Evidence was collected that the working fluid of the adhesive organ has the properties of a dilute aqueous solution of a surfactant. There is a considerable reserve of fluid, presumably in the cuticle of the adhesive organ. Introduction The mechanism by which certain insects can walk on smooth vertical and even inverted surfaces has long interested entomologists and recently there have been several studies on this subject (Stork, 1980; Wigglesworth, 1987; Lees and Hardie, 1988). The elegant study of Lees and Hardie (1988) on the feet of the vetch aphid Megoura viciae Buckt.
    [Show full text]
  • Type and Distribution of Sensilla in the Antennae of the Red Clover Root Borer, Hylastinus Obscurus
    Journal of Insect Science: Vol. 13 | Article 133 Palma et al. Type and distribution of sensilla in the antennae of the red clover root borer, Hylastinus obscurus Rubén Palma1,4a, Ana Mutis2b, Rufus Isaacs3c, Andrés Quiroz2d 1Doctorate Program in Sciences and Natural Resources. Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco 4811230, Araucanía, Chile 2Departamento de Ciencias Químicas y Recursos Naturales, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco 4811230, Araucanía, Chile Downloaded from 3Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824 4Current address: Laboratorio de Interacciones Insecto-Planta, Universidad de Talca, Talca, Chile Abstract In order to determine the type, distribution, and structures of sensilla, the antennae of the red clo- http://jinsectscience.oxfordjournals.org/ ver root borer, Hylastinus obscurus Marsham (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae), were examined by light and electron microscopy (both scanning and transmission). Four different types of sensilla were identified in the club, and one type of chaetica was found in the scape and funicle of both male and female individuals. Chaetica and basiconica were the most abundant sensilla types in the club. They were present in the three sensory bands described, totaling ap- proximately 80% of sensilla in the antennal club of H. obscurus. Chaetica were predominantly mechanoreceptors, although gustatory function could not be excluded. Basiconica forms showed characteristics typical of olfactory sensilla. Trichoidea were not found in the proximal sensory by guest on April 29, 2015 band, and they exhibited abundant pores, suggesting olfactory function. Styloconica were the least abundant sensillum type, and their shape was similar to that reported as having hygro- and thermoreceptor functions. There was no difference in the relative abundance of antennal sensilla between males and females.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan
    Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan June 2005 Martin Nugent, Chair Wildlife Diversity Coordinator Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife PO Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 (503) 872-5260 x5346 FAX: (503) 872-5269 [email protected] Kev Alexanian Dan Hilburn Sam Chan Bill Reynolds Suzanne Cudd Eric Schwamberger Risa Demasi Mark Systma Chris Guntermann Mandy Tu Randy Henry 7/15/05 Table of Contents Chapter 1........................................................................................................................3 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 What’s Going On?........................................................................................................................................ 3 Oregon Examples......................................................................................................................................... 5 Goal............................................................................................................................................................... 6 Invasive Species Council................................................................................................................. 6 Statute ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 Functions .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Contribution to the Aphid Fauna of Greece
    Bulletin of Insectology 60 (1): 31-38, 2007 ISSN 1721-8861 A contribution to the aphid fauna of Greece 1,5 2 1,6 3 John A. TSITSIPIS , Nikos I. KATIS , John T. MARGARITOPOULOS , Dionyssios P. LYKOURESSIS , 4 1,7 1 3 Apostolos D. AVGELIS , Ioanna GARGALIANOU , Kostas D. ZARPAS , Dionyssios Ch. PERDIKIS , 2 Aristides PAPAPANAYOTOU 1Laboratory of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology, Department of Agriculture Crop Production and Rural Environment, University of Thessaly, Nea Ionia, Magnesia, Greece 2Laboratory of Plant Pathology, Department of Agriculture, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece 3Laboratory of Agricultural Zoology and Entomology, Agricultural University of Athens, Greece 4Plant Virology Laboratory, Plant Protection Institute of Heraklion, National Agricultural Research Foundation (N.AG.RE.F.), Heraklion, Crete, Greece 5Present address: Amfikleia, Fthiotida, Greece 6Present address: Institute of Technology and Management of Agricultural Ecosystems, Center for Research and Technology, Technology Park of Thessaly, Volos, Magnesia, Greece 7Present address: Department of Biology-Biotechnology, University of Thessaly, Larissa, Greece Abstract In the present study a list of the aphid species recorded in Greece is provided. The list includes records before 1992, which have been published in previous papers, as well as data from an almost ten-year survey using Rothamsted suction traps and Moericke traps. The recorded aphidofauna consisted of 301 species. The family Aphididae is represented by 13 subfamilies and 120 genera (300 species), while only one genus (1 species) belongs to Phylloxeridae. The aphid fauna is dominated by the subfamily Aphidi- nae (57.1 and 68.4 % of the total number of genera and species, respectively), especially the tribe Macrosiphini, and to a lesser extent the subfamily Eriosomatinae (12.6 and 8.3 % of the total number of genera and species, respectively).
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Clover Root Borer
    STUDIES ON THE CLOVER ROOT BORER, HYMSTINUS OBSCURUS (KARSHAM) DISSERTATION Presented in Partial FuliiIlment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By KENNETH PAUL FRUESS, B.S., M.S. The Ohio State University 1957 Approved by: Adviser Department of Zoology and Entomology ACKSQttffiCMST^TS ?he research for this dissertation was done a t the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, W o o s t e r , Ohio, w h e r e I was employed as a Research Assistant from June, 1 9 5 ^ j to March, 1957. I am grateful for the facilities offered t > y this instituition and for the aid of .many members of the stafr d u r i n g my s t a y there. I wish especially to thank Dr, C » -ft. Weaver, wino encouraged this research and offered many h e l p f u H suggestions and criticisms. I also wish to thank Dr, Ralph H . Davidson, w h o acted as n y adviser at The Ohio State University a n d directed m y work there. Valuable information was supplied t y the f ol lowing persons a m is gratefully acknowledged: Mr. A, Dickason, Oregon State College; Dr, Ray T, Everly, Purdue University,* Dr. G-eorge G. Gyrisco and Mr, Carlton S, Koehler, C o r n e l l University; and Dr, A. K. Woodside, Virginia Agricultural Experiment Sts/tion. ii TABLE OF CON TENTS Page INTRODUCTION ........ 1 PART I. THE CLOVER ROOT BORER ................... 2 Taxonomic Position ...................
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Administrative Code Between the Dates of October 1, 2020 Through December 31, 2020 (Supp
    3 A.A.C. 4 Supp. 20-4 December 31, 2020 Title 3 TITLE 3. AGRICULTURE CHAPTER 4. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - PLANT SERVICES DIVISION The table of contents on the first page contains quick links to the referenced page numbers in this Chapter. Refer to the notes at the end of a Section to learn about the history of a rule as it was published in the Arizona Administrative Register. Sections, Parts, Exhibits, Tables or Appendices codified in this supplement. The list provided contains quick links to the updated rules. This Chapter contains rule Sections that were filed to be codified in the Arizona Administrative Code between the dates of October 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020 (Supp. 20-4). Table 1. Fee Schedule ......................................................47 Questions about these rules? Contact: Name: Brian McGrew Address: Department of Agriculture 1688 W. Adams St. Phoenix, AZ 85007 Telephone: (602) 542-3228 Fax: (602) 542-1004 E-mail: [email protected] Website: https://agriculture.az.gov/plantsproduce/industrial- hemp-program The release of this Chapter in Supp. 20-4 replaces Supp. 20-3, 1-50 pages Please note that the Chapter you are about to replace may have rules still in effect after the publication date of this supplement. Therefore, all superseded material should be retained in a separate binder and archived for future reference. i PREFACE Under Arizona law, the Department of State, Office of the Secretary of State (Office), accepts state agency rule filings and is the publisher of Arizona rules. The Office of the Secretary of State does not interpret or enforce rules in the Administrative Code.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 Biodiversity Snapshot. Isle of Man Appendices
    UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies: 2011 Biodiversity snapshot. Isle of Man: Appendices. Author: Elizabeth Charter Principal Biodiversity Officer (Strategy and Advocacy). Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, Isle of man. More information available at: www.gov.im/defa/ This section includes a series of appendices that provide additional information relating to that provided in the Isle of Man chapter of the publication: UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies: 2011 Biodiversity snapshot. All information relating to the Isle or Man is available at http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5819 The entire publication is available for download at http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5821 1 Table of Contents Appendix 1: Multilateral Environmental Agreements ..................................................................... 3 Appendix 2 National Wildife Legislation ......................................................................................... 5 Appendix 3: Protected Areas .......................................................................................................... 6 Appendix 4: Institutional Arrangements ........................................................................................ 10 Appendix 5: Research priorities .................................................................................................... 13 Appendix 6 Ecosystem/habitats ................................................................................................... 14 Appendix 7: Species ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • POPULATION DYNAMICS of the SYCAMORE APHID (Drepanosiphum Platanoidis Schrank)
    POPULATION DYNAMICS OF THE SYCAMORE APHID (Drepanosiphum platanoidis Schrank) by Frances Antoinette Wade, B.Sc. (Hons.), M.Sc. A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of London, and the Diploma of Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine. Department of Biology, Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7PY, U.K. August 1999 1 THESIS ABSTRACT Populations of the sycamore aphid Drepanosiphum platanoidis Schrank (Homoptera: Aphididae) have been shown to undergo regular two-year cycles. It is thought this phenomenon is caused by an inverse seasonal relationship in abundance operating between spring and autumn of each year. It has been hypothesised that the underlying mechanism of this process is due to a plant factor, intra-specific competition between aphids, or a combination of the two. This thesis examines the population dynamics and the life-history characteristics of D. platanoidis, with an emphasis on elucidating the factors involved in driving the dynamics of the aphid population, especially the role of bottom-up forces. Manipulating host plant quality with different levels of aphids in the early part of the year, showed that there was a contrast in aphid performance (e.g. duration of nymphal development, reproductive duration and output) between the first (spring) and the third (autumn) aphid generations. This indicated that aphid infestation history had the capacity to modify host plant nutritional quality through the year. However, generalist predators were not key regulators of aphid abundance during the year, while the specialist parasitoids showed a tightly bound relationship to its prey. The effect of a fungal endophyte infecting the host plant generally showed a neutral effect on post-aestivation aphid dynamics and the degree of parasitism in autumn.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................ 1 Authors, Reviewers, Draft Log ........................................................................................ 3 Introduction to Reference ................................................................................................ 5 Introduction to Stone Fruit ............................................................................................. 10 Arthropods ................................................................................................................... 16 Primary Pests of Stone Fruit (Full Pest Datasheet) ....................................................... 16 Adoxophyes orana ................................................................................................. 16 Bactrocera zonata .................................................................................................. 27 Enarmonia formosana ............................................................................................ 39 Epiphyas postvittana .............................................................................................. 47 Grapholita funebrana ............................................................................................. 62 Leucoptera malifoliella ........................................................................................... 72 Lobesia botrana ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Coverage of Urban Habitats and Species Within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan
    Report Number 651 Review of the coverage of urban habitats and species within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan English Nature Research Reports working today for nature tomorrow English Nature Research Reports Number 651 Review of the coverage of urban habitats and species within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan Dr Graham Tucker Dr Hilary Ash Colin Plant Environmental Impacts Team You may reproduce as many additional copies of this report as you like, provided such copies stipulate that copyright remains with English Nature, Northminster House, Peterborough PE1 1UA ISSN 0967-876X © Copyright English Nature 2005 Acknowledgements The project was managed by David Knight of English Nature, and we thank him for his advice and assistance. Thanks are also due to Mark Crick and Ian Strachan of JNCC for their comments on the draft report and information on the current UKBAP review, and English Nature library staff for their invaluable assistance with obtaining reference materials. We especially thank the following individuals and their organisations for their valuable comments on the consultation draft of this report: George Barker, John Box, Professor Tony Bradshaw, John Buckley (The Herpetological Trust), Paul Chanin (for The Mammal Society), John Davis (Butterfly Conservation), Mike Eyre, Tony Gent (The Herpetological Conservation Trust), Chris Gibson (English Nature), Eric Greenwood, Phil Grice (English Nature), Mathew Frith, Nick Moyes, John Newbold (for The National Federation of Biological Recorders), Dominic Price (Plantlife), Alison Rasey (The Bat Conservation Trust), Ian Rotherham (Sheffield University), Richard Scott (Landlife), Martin Wigginton and Robin Wynde (RSPB). Additional information and advice was also provided by Dan Chamberlain, Rob Robinson, and Juliet Vickery (British Trust for Ornithology) and Will Peach (RSPB).
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Sex Pheromone of the Vetch Aphid, Megoura Viciae
    ogo STUDIES ON THE SEX PHEROMONE OF THE VETCH APHID, MEGOURA VICIAE. by David Marsh B.Tech. (Brunel) A thesis submitted for the degree of. Doctor of Philosophy of the University of London. or- Imperial College Field Station, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berks. July 1973 • 2 ABSTRACT Oviparae of Megoura viciae have been shown to release a sex pheromone from their hind tibiae. Morphological evidence strongly suggests that the pseudosensoria present on these leg segments are responsible. The involvement of the pheromone in the attraction of males to females, and in copulation, has been studied. A bioassay based on the short-range orientation responses of the males was developed and used to assess various factors which might affect chemical- communication between the sexes. Males become highly responsive to the female scent within the 24 h following the imaginal ecdysis and remain so for the rest of their lives. Their responsiveness does not vary during the daily I2-h • light period. Copulation with females that are not releasing their pheromone does not affect their subsequent responsiveness to the pheromone. The presence of the secondary rhinaria on the male's antennae was found to be essential for a response. Females show a daily pattern of scent release which changes as they age. Both the rate and duration of release increase daily to reach a maximum by the sixth day of adult life. Thereafter, they decline gradually. Pheromone liberation is under the control of an endogenous rhythm, but is also influenced by environmental factors. The pheromone appears to be present in the tibiae only at those times at which it is released.
    [Show full text]