4.4 Article

Dietary protein and sodium co-limit cockroach growth and reproduction

期刊

ECOLOGICAL ENTOMOLOGY
卷 47, 期 5, 页码 831-841

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/een.13173

关键词

Blaptica dubia; co-limitation; insect herbivore; protein; sodium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Both dietary protein and sodium are important for the growth and reproduction of insect herbivores, and their interaction can enhance cockroach growth rate and offspring weight.
Both dietary protein (N) and sodium (Na) are essential nutrients for invertebrate growth and reproduction. Field studies show that insects aggregate in areas with both high protein and sodium and their abundance is co-limited by these two essential nutrients, but the mechanism behind this aggregation is not well known. We examined a possible mechanism that dietary protein and sodium co-limit insect herbivore growth and reproduction. To test this mechanism, we conducted a feeding experiment examining the effect of these two nutrients by using artificial diets with two levels of protein and three levels of sodium on a generalist herbivorous cockroach Blaptica dubia. Elevated levels of dietary sodium interacted with low protein level to increase cockroach nymph relative growth rate during earlier instars. Female cockroaches always weighed more and had a higher relative growth rate than males regardless of dietary treatment. When compared between different dietary treatments, female cockroaches' relative growth rates were higher when fed with a high protein diet, while male cockroaches reached the final instar faster when fed with a high sodium diet. Cockroach reproduction was not affected by protein or sodium alone, but the combination of a high protein and high sodium diet resulted in the heaviest offspring. Our results suggest that both protein and sodium may be important for both the growth and reproduction of insect herbivores. The interaction of these two nutrients to improve cockroach growth and reproduction indicate a level of co-limitation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据