4.4 Article

Predation by the carabid beetle Harpalus rufipes on the pest slug Deroceras reticulatum in the laboratory

Journal

ANNALS OF APPLIED BIOLOGY
Volume 170, Issue 2, Pages 251-262

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aab.12337

Keywords

Alternative prey; biological control; Deroceras reticulatum; Harpalus rufipes; slug eggs; slug predator; slug size

Funding

  1. Egyptian Higher Ministry of Education

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Harpalini species Harpalus rufipes, as many other generalist carabids, consume a wide variety of prey and it is known to feed on pest slugs such as the grey field slug Deroceras reticulatum, but quantitative data about the predatory activity of H. rufipes on slugs are very scarce. In laboratory experiments, we assessed the capability of male H. rufipes to kill eggs and different-sized slugs of the pest species D. reticulatum in either the absence or the presence of alternative live prey (dipteran larvae and aphids). We also investigated the preference of H. rufipes for eggs and hatchlings of D. reticulatum in a choice experiment. H. rufipes killed considerable amounts of eggs and small juveniles (<= 5.0mg) of D. reticulatum, both in no-choice and in choice situations. Medium-sized juvenile slugs (10-20mg) were seldom killed only in no-choice situations, and no large juveniles (50-60mg) were killed. Dipteran larvae and aphids were killed also in no-choice and in choice situations. The type of alternative prey presented with slug eggs affected the survival of the eggs to H. rufipes predation. The presence of dipteran larvae as alternative prey did not affect the survival of juvenile slugs. When eggs and small juvenile slugs were offered together, the survivals of both items were similar. The obtained results under laboratory conditions suggest that the generalist predator H. rufipes might realise an important contribution to the control of pest slugs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available