Journal
BIOCONTROL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages 871-880Publisher
TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09583150903168549
Keywords
biological control; Carabidae; Chrysomelidae; maize; predation; rootworm
Categories
Funding
- OECD Research Fellowship
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The physical and chemical aspects of Diabrotica virgifera virgifera larval hemolymph were quantitatively assessed against two predatory beetle species in the laboratory. Adult Poecilus cupreus and Harpalus pensylvanicus (Coleoptera: Carabidae) were fed pupae, second or third instar D. v. virgifera or a palatable surrogate prey, i.e., Calliphora vicina or Sarcophaga bullata larvae (Diptera: Calliphoridae, Sarcophagidae, respectively) of equivalent size. The ethanol-soluble fraction of third instar D. v. virgifera hemolymph was extracted and suspended in a 0.24 M sucrose solution and offered to H. pensylvanicus (using a sucrose only control for comparison). The mean duration until first consumption was recorded for each predator, as was the amount of time spent eating, cleaning, resting, or walking for 2 min post-attack (or 5 min for the sugar assay). Maggots and D. virgifera larvae and pupae were attacked equally by both predators. But upon attack, D. v. virgifera larval hemolymph coagulated onto the mouthparts of the predators, which they began vigorously cleaning. Predators ate the sucrose solution for significantly longer than hemolymph + sucrose solution, indicating the presence of deterrent chemicals in the hemolymph. This research suggests that D. v. virgifera larvae are defended from predation by sticky and repellent hemolymph. We hypothesize that this defense partially explains the widespread success of D. v. virgifera as an invasive pest.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available