4.6 Article

Aspects of the reproductive biology of Pseudaphycus maculipennis (Hym: Encyrtidae), a parasitoid of obscure mealybug, Pseudococcus viburni (Hem: Pseudococcidae)

期刊

BIOLOGICAL CONTROL
卷 48, 期 1, 页码 30-35

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.09.008

关键词

Pseudaphycus maculipennis; Pseudococcus viburni; Biology; Reproduction

资金

  1. The Foundation for Research, Science and Technology [C06X0301]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laboratory experiments to determine aspects of the reproductive biology of Pseudaphycus maculipennis are described. All experiments were carried out at a constant temperature of 21 +/- 2 degrees C, a 16-h photoperiod and ambient RH. Pseudaphycus maculipennis was shown to be an arrhenotokous, synovigenic, gregarious endoparasitoid of Pseudococcus viburni. Females and males lived for 16 and 11 days, respectively, when fed either honey-agar or mealybug honeydew. Relatively, large instars (third instar or adult females) were preferred for oviposition; mated females parasitized more mealybugs than unmated females, and the progeny sex ratio favored females by 3:1. Egg load increased with age from emergence to day 8, averaging 23 mature eggs/female. Mean realised daily fecundity never exceeded 5, with a mean lifetime fecundity of 46 eggs/female. Parasitised mealybugs remained alive for about 5 days and then mummified. Total development period was 20-21 days (larva 4-5 days, prepupa 3 days, pupa 8-9 days). Development periods of eggs and individual larval instars were not measured. A mean of 3.01 +/- 0.1 parasitoids/mealybug were reared after individual parasitism events, increasing through super-parasitism (either self or conspecific) to 9 parasitoids/mealybug when hosts were exposed to competing females. Pseudaphycus maculipennis progeny emerged from the mummies in discrete cohorts over periods ranging from 3 min to 18 h (depending on the number of cohorts). (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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