Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T07:39:51.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IMMATURE STAGES AND BIOLOGY OF ZELUS SOCIUS (HEMIPTERA: REDUVIIDAE)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Stephen O. Swadener  and
Thomas R. Yonke
Stephen O. Swadener
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Missouri, Columbia
Thomas R. Yonke
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Missouri, Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The egg and five nymphal instars of Zelus socius Uhler are described and illustrated. The eggs are elongate-oval, 1.39 mm high and 0.53 mm in diameter (mean values). The mean lengths of nymphs are 2.45, 3.47, 5.64, 7.56, and 10.49 mm in the five stages, respectively. The developmental period for eggs averaged 9.0 days and the nymphal development averaged 52.6 days. There is one generation a year.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 105 , Issue 2 , February 1973 , pp. 231 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blatchley, W. S. 1926. Heteroptera or true bugs of Eastern North America. 1116 pp. Nature, Indianapolis.Google Scholar
Coppel, H. C. and Jones, P. A.. 1962. Bionomics of Podisus spp. associated with the introduced pine sawfly, Diprion similis (Htg.), in Wisconsin. Wisc. Acad. Sci., Arts Lett. 51: 31–56.Google Scholar
DeCoursey, R. M. 1963. The life history of Fitchia aptera Stål (Hemiptera–Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Bull. Brooklyn ent. Soc. 58: 151–156.Google Scholar
Drew, W. A. and Schaefer, K.. 1962. Reduvioidea of Oklahoma. Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci. 43: 98–112.Google Scholar
Elkins, J. C. 1951. The Reduviidae of Texas. Tex. J. Sci. 3: 407–412.Google Scholar
Ewing, K. P. and Ivy, E. E.. 1943. Some factors influencing bollworm populations and damage. J. econ. Ent. 36: 602–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Froeschner, R. C. 1944. Contributions to a synopsis of the Hemiptera of Missouri, Part 3; Lygaeidae, Pyrrhocoridae, Piesmidae, Tingidae, Enicocephalidae, Phymatidae, Ploiariidae, Reduviidae, Nabidae. Am. Midl. Nat. 31: 638–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillette, C. P. and Baker, C. F.. 1895. A preliminary list of the Hemiptera of Colorado. Bull. Colo. agric. Coll. Exp. Stn 31, Tech. Ser. 1, 137 pp.Google Scholar
Hart, C. A. 1907. On the biology of the sand areas of Illinois. Pt. III. Zoological studies in the sand region of the Illinois and Mississippi River Valleys. Bull. Ill. St. Lab. nat. Hist. 7: 195–267.Google Scholar
Readio, P. A. 1926. Studies of the eggs of some Reduviidae. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 16: 157–179.Google Scholar
Readio, P. A. 1927. Biology of the Reduviidae of America north of Mexico. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 17: 5–291.Google Scholar
Severin, H. H. P. 1924. Natural enemies of beet leafhopper (Eutettix tenella Baker). J. econ. Ent. 17: 369–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhler, P. R. 1872. Notices of the Hemiptera of the Western Territories of the U.S., chiefly from the survey of Dr. F. V. Hayden. Prelim. Rep. U.S. Geol. Surv. Montana 1872, pp. 392–423.Google Scholar
Werner, F. G. and Butler, G. D.. 1957. The reduviids and nabids associated with Arizona crops. Tech. Bull. Ariz. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 133, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Whitcomb, W. H. and Bell, K.. 1964. Predacious insects, spiders, and mites of Arkansas cotton fields. Bull. Ark. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 690, pp. 1–84.Google Scholar