4.4 Article

Hybridization between Dactylopius tomentosus (Hemiptera: Dactylopiidae) biotypes and its effects on host specificity

期刊

BULLETIN OF ENTOMOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 100, 期 3, 页码 331-338

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0007485309990344

关键词

interbreeding; reciprocal crossing; biotypes; host specificity; weed biocontrol

资金

  1. South African Department of Agriculture
  2. National Research Foundation
  3. University of Cape Town
  4. Centre for Plants and the Environment, University of Western Sydney, Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dactylopius tomentosus is composed of biotypes adapted to different Cylindropuntia species. One biotype is an important biological control agent of C. imbricata in South Africa while another has the potential for the control of C. fulgida var. fulgida. These two weed species occur in sympatry in some areas of South Africa, so the introduction of the second biotype could result in hybridization, which, in turn, could impact on the biological control programs through altered host specificity and fitness of the hybrids. To anticipate what might happen, reciprocal crosses were made between the two biotypes, and the biological performance of the resultant hybrids was compared with that of each parental lineage on C. imbricata and C. f. var. fulgida. The biotypes interbred freely and reciprocally in the laboratory. Comparisons of crawler and adult female traits showed differences in performance that were dependent on the origin of the maternal and paternal genomes. However, when all traits were combined into a 'fitness index', both hybrids clearly outperformed the parental lineages. The increase in fitness shown by the hybrids over their maternal lineage was greater on the alternative host of the maternal parent than on the natural host of the maternal parent. Therefore, in areas where the two cacti occur in sympatry, hybridization between the biotypes is not expected to be detrimental to the biological control of either weed.

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