4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Asymmetry of larval diet breadth and oviposition preference in Leptinotarsa undecimlineata

期刊

ENTOMOLOGIA EXPERIMENTALIS ET APPLICATA
卷 128, 期 1, 页码 27-33

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1570-7458.2008.00696.x

关键词

preference-performance hypothesis; preimaginal conditioning; optimal oviposition choice; Solanum lanceolatum; Solanum myriacanthum; Coleoptera; Chrysomelidae

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The relationship between preference and performance was studied under laboratory conditions for larvae and adult females of Leptinotarsa undecimlineata (Stal) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Leptinotarsa undecimlineata feeds exclusively on Solanum lanceolatum L. (Solanaceae) in the centre of Veracruz, Mexico. A common sympatric species, Solanum myriacanthum Dunal, is not used as host. We conducted a series of laboratory experiments to detect reasons for the exclusive use of one host plant. Leptinotarsa undecimlineata larvae were reared under laboratory conditions on both plant species, Solanum lanceolatum and S. myriacanthum. Length of larval stages, pupal weight, and percent adult eclosion were compared, and larval preference for both Solanum species was tested. Upon eclosion, adult females were exposed to each of the plants, and the effect of larval diet on adult preference was determined. Oviposition on both Solanum species was observed in no-choice tests. Larvae showed no significant preferences for either plant species. Pupal weight, however, was significantly higher on S. lanceolatum. Female beetles significantly preferred S. lanceolatum leaves, and no effect of preimaginal conditioning was found. Females reproduced in lower numbers after feeding on S. myriacanthum, oviposition initiated later, and females laid fewer eggs than females fed with S. lanceolatum. No female accepted S. myriacanthum for oviposition. Results obtained suggest that the potential host breadth of L. undecimlineata is broader in larvae than in female beetles.

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

4.3
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