Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:06:48.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

POPULATION DYNAMICS OF TELENOMUS FARIAI (HYMENOPTERA: SCELIONIDAE), A PARASITE OF CHAGAS’ DISEASE VECTORS: VII. OVIPOSITION BEHAVIOR AND HOST DISCRIMINATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Carlos Bosque  and
Jorge E. Rabinovich
Carlos Bosque
Affiliation:
Centro de Ecologia, Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cientificas, Apartado 1827, Caracas 101, Venezuela
Jorge E. Rabinovich
Affiliation:
Centro de Ecologia, Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cientificas, Apartado 1827, Caracas 101, Venezuela
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Oviposition and post-oviposition behavior of Telenomus fariai Costa Lima, when parasitizing the eggs of Triatoma phillosoma pallidipennis Stål, is described. Like other egg parasites T. fariai marks hosts by rubbing the ovipositor against the host and transferring a water soluble pheromone (chemical nature unknown) to its surface. Females that had never parasitized largely ignored the mark. Females that had parasitized generally did not oviposit on a marked host. The mark was fully effective for at least 3 days after being applied. The function of egg marking by T. fariai is discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 111 , Issue 2 , February 1979 , pp. 171 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1979

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

Bakker, K. et al. 1967. Host discrimination in Pseudeucoila bochei (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae). Entomologia exp. appl. 10: 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balduf, W. U. 1926. Telenomus cosmopeplae Gahan, an egg parasite of Cosmopepla bimaculata Thomas. J. econ. Ent. 19: 829–841.Google Scholar
Bragg, D. E. 1974. Ecological and Behavioral studies of Phaeogenes cynarae: Ecology; host specificity; searching and oviposition; and avoidance of superparasitism. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 67: 931–936.Google Scholar
Costa Lima, A. 1927. Nota sobre o Telenomus fariai, novo scelionideo, parasito endophago dos ovos de Triatoma megista. (Burm.). Sciencia Medica 5: 450–452.Google Scholar
Costa Lima, A. 1928. Notas sobre a biologia do Telenomus fariai Lima, parasito dos ovos de Triatoma. Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz 21: 201–209.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. C. 1971. Aspects of the physiology of endoparasitic hymenoptera. Biol. Rev. 46: 243–278.Google Scholar
Flanders, S. E. 1935. Host influence on the prolificacy and size of Trichogramma. Pan-Pacif. Ent. 11: 175–177.Google Scholar
Ganesalingam, V. K. 1974. Mechanism of discrimination between parasitized and unparasitized hosts by Venturia canescens (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). Entomologia exp. appl. 17: 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerling, D. and Schwartz, A.. 1974. Host selection by Telenomus remus, a parasite of Spodoptera littoralis eggs. Entomologia exp. appl. 17: 391–396.Google Scholar
Gordh, G. and Coker, R. A.. 1973. A new species of Telenomus parasitic on Geocoris (Hymenoptera: Proctotrupoidea; Hemiptera: Lygaeidae) in California. Can. Ent. 105: 1407–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greany, P. D. and Oatman, E. R.. 1972. Analysis of host discrimination in the parasitic Orgilus lepidus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 65: 377–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hokyo, N. and Kiritani, K.. 1966. Oviposition behavior of two egg parasites, Asolcus mitsukurii Ashmead and Telenomus nakagawai Watanabe. Entomophaga 11: 191–201.Google Scholar
Hokyo, N., Shiga, M., and Nakasuji, F.. 1966. The effect of intra and interspecific conditioning of host eggs on the ovipositional behavior of two scelionid egg parasites of the southern green stink bug, Nezara viridula L. Jap. J. Ecol. 16: 67–71.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. J. 1958. Observations on the biology of Caraphractus cinctus Walker (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae), a parasitoid of the egg of Dytiscidae. I. Methods of rearing and number bred on different host eggs. Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 110: 533–554.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. J. 1966. Observations on the biology of Caraphractus cinctus Walker (Hymenoptera: Myrmaridae), a parasitoid of the eggs of Dytiscidae (Coleoptera). III. The adult life and sex ratio. Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 118: 23–49.Google Scholar
Javahery, M. 1967. The biology of some Pentatomoidea and their egg parasites. Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
King, P. E., Askew, R. R., and Sanger, C.. 1969. The detection of parasitized hosts by males Nasonia vitripennis (Walker) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) and some possible implications. Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 44: 85–90.Google Scholar
King, P. E. and Rafai, J.. 1970. Host discrimination in a gregarious parasitoid Nasonia vitripennis (Walker) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). J. exp. Biol. 53: 245–254.Google Scholar
Lamotte, M. 1965. Estadistica biologica. Toray-Masson, S.A. Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
Lever, R. A. 1933. Notes on the oviposition habits of two hymenopterous egg-parasites of Axiagastus campelli Dist. (Pentatomidae). Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 8: 139–141.Google Scholar
Lloyd, D. C. 1942. Further experiments on host selection by Hymenopterous parasites of the moth Plutella maculipennis Curtis. Revue can. Biol. 633–645.Google Scholar
Lloyd, D. C. 1956. Studies on parasite oviposition behavior I. Mastrus carpocapsae Cushman (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). Can. Ent. 88: 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayr, E. 1963. Animal species and evolution. The Belknap Press of Harvard University press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Mazza, S. 1942. Consideraciones sobre la enfermedad de Chagas en Bolivia. La Prensa Médica Argentina 29: 1–23.Google Scholar
Mazza, S. and Jörg, M. E.. 1938. Tercera nota sobre “Triatomidae” (Hemipt. Het. Reduvioidea) Argentinos. Miscelánea Estado Patagonia Region Argentina Publ. 36: 26–58.Google Scholar
Morril, A. W. 1907. Description of a new species of Telenomus with observation on its habitat and life history. Am. Nat. 41: 417–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelaez, D. 1944. Algunas notas sobre el hallazgo en México de un microhimenóptero parásito de huevos de Triatoma pallidipennis (Stål). Ciencia 5: 29–33.Google Scholar
Pellegrino, J. 1950 a. Nota sôbre o parasitismo de ovos de Triatoma infestans e Pastrongylus megistus pelo microhimenoptero Telenomus fariai Lima, 1927. Mem. Inst. Osw. Cruz 48: 669–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellegrino, J. 1950 b. Parasitismo experimental de ovos de varias especies de Triatoma pelo microhimenoptero Telenomus fariai Lima, 1927. Mem. Inst. Osw. Cruz 48: 674–686.Google Scholar
Rabb, R. L. and Bradley, J. R.. 1970. Marking host eggs by Telenomus sphingis. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 63: 1053–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabinovich, J. E. 1970 a. Population dynamics of Telenomus fariai (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae), a parasite of Chagas' disease vectors. II. Effect of host-egg age. J. med. Ent. 7: 477–481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabinovich, J. E. 1970 b. Population dynamics of Telenomus fariai (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae), a parasite of Chagas' disease vectors. IV. Effects of female size on progeny. J. med. Ent. 7: 561–565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabinovich, J. E. 1970 c. Population dynamics of Telenomus fariai (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae), a parasite of Chagas' disease vectors. VI. Ability to discriminate between parasitized and non-parasitized hosts. Acta Cientif. Venezolana 21: 154–156.Google Scholar
Rabinovich, J. E. 1971 a. Population dynamics of Telenomus fariai (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae), a parasite of Chagas' disease vectors. II. Preference for and progeny from different age classes of host eggs. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 29–32.Google Scholar
Rabinovich, J. E. 1971 b. Population dynamics of Telenomus fariai (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae), a parasite of Chagas' disease vectors. V. Parasite size and vital space. Rev. Biol. Trop. 19(1, 2): 109–120.Google ScholarPubMed
Rabinovich, J. E., Escalante, G., and Rodríguez, A.. 1970. Dinámica poblacional de Telenomus fariai (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). I. Efecto de la carencia de huéspedes (Triatoma phyllosoma) (Hemiptera: Reduviidae) sobre la producción de progenie. Acta biol. Venezuela 7: 5–21.Google Scholar
Rogers, D. 1972. The ichneumon wasp Venturia canescens: oviposition and avoidance of super-parasitism. Entomologia exp. appl. 15: 190–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salt, G. 1937. The sense used by Trichogramma to distinguish between parasitized and unparasitized hosts. Experimental studies in insect parasitism. V. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. 122: 57–75.Google Scholar
Salt, G. 1938. Experimental studies in insect parasitism. VI. Host suitability. Bull. ent. Res. 29: 223–246.Google Scholar
Salt, G. 1961. Competition among insect parasitoids. Symp. Soc. exp. Biol. 15: 96–119.Google Scholar
Schwartz, A. and Gerling, D.. 1974. Adult biology of Telenomus remus (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) under laboratory conditions. Entomophaga 19: 482–492.Google Scholar
Simmonds, F. J. 1954. Host finding and selection by Spalangia drosophilae Ashm. Bull. ent. Res. 45: 527–537.Google Scholar
Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, J.. 1969. Biometry. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Taylor, T. C. H. 1937. The biological control of an insect in Fiji. Imp. Inst. Entomol., London.Google Scholar
Ticehurst, M. and Allen, D. C.. 1973. Notes on the biology of Telenomus coelodasidis (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) and its relationship to the saddled prominent, Heterocarpa guttivitta (Lepidoptera: Notodontidae). Can. Ent. 105: 1133–1143.Google Scholar
Van Lenteren, J. and Bakker, K.. 1975. Discrimination between parasitized and unparasitized hosts in the parasitic wasp Pseudeucoila bochei: a matter of learning. Nature 254: 417–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vinson, S. B. 1972. Competition and host discrimination between two species of Tobacco budworm parasitoids. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 65: 229–236.Google Scholar
Vowkassovitch, P. 1925. Observations biologiques sur Trissolcus simoni parasite de la punaise du chou Eurydema (Pentatoma) ornatum. Feuille Nat. 46: 97–100.Google Scholar
Weseloh, R. M. 1976. Discrimination between parasitized and nonparasitized hosts by the Gypsy moth larval parasitoid Apanteles melanosalus (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Can. Ent. 108: 395–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, F. 1961. Adult reproductive behavior in Asolcus basalis (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Aust. J. Zool. 9: 737–751.Google Scholar
Winburn, T. F. and Painter, R. H.. 1932. Insect enemies of the corn earworm (Heliothis obsoleta Fabr.). J. Kans. ent. Soc. 5: 1–28.Google Scholar
Wylie, H. G. 1965. Discrimination between parasitized and unparasitized house fly pupae by females of Nasonia vitripennis (Walk) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Can. Ent. 97: 279–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, H. G. 1970. Oviposition restraint of Nasonia vitripennis (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) on hosts parasitized by other hymenopterous species. Can. Ent. 102: 886–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, H. G. 1972. Oviposition restraint of Spalangia cameroni (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) on parasitized house fly pupae. Can. Ent. 104: 209–214.Google Scholar
Zeledon, R. 1957. Sobre la biología del Telenomus fariai Lima, 1927. (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Rev. Biol. Trop. 5: 1–17.Google Scholar