Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:45:50.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological variation in spring migrants of Myzus persicae (Sulz.) (Hemiptera, Aphididae): comparison of alatae from peach and mangold

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

J. A. T. Woodford  and
P. M. Lerman
J. A. T. Woodford
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, University of Cambridge, CB2 3DX, England
P. M. Lerman
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, University of Cambridge, CB2 3DX, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Spring migrants of Myzus persicae (Sulz.) may be produced either by parthenogenetic aphids derived from fertilised eggs laid on the primary host, or by parthenogenetic aphids overwintering on secondary hosts. Five variates, based1 on eight morphological characters of alate M. persicae, are examined to investigate how to distinguish between alatae derived from populations that have overwintered by these two means. No single variate is adequate to identify correctly all specimens, although two of them, number of abdominal tubercles, and shape of the fenestra in the central abdominal patch, may each correctly assign as many as 90%.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 64 , Issue 4 , December 1974 , pp. 595 - 604
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blackman, R. L. (1971). Variation in the photoperiodic response within natural populations of Myzus persicae (Sulz.).—Bull. ent. Res. 60, 533–546.Google Scholar
Börner, C. (1951). Kleiner Beitrag zur Kenntnis von Myzodes persicae Sulzer.—NachrBl. dt. PflSchutzdienst, Berl. 5, 101–111.Google Scholar
Broadbent, L. (1949). The grouping and overwintering of Myzus persicae Sulz. on Prunus species.—Ann. appl. Biol. 36, 334–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broadbent, L. & Heathcote, G. D. (1955). Sources of overwintering Myzus persicae (Sulzer) in England.—Pl. Path. 4, 135–137.Google Scholar
Buckton, G. B. (1876). Monograph of the British Aphides.—Vol. 1, 193 pp. London, Ray Society.Google Scholar
Cottier, W. (1953). Aphids of New Zealand.—Bull. N.Z. Dep. scient. ind. Res. no. 106, xi + 382 pp.Google Scholar
Eastop, V. F. (1973). Biotypes of aphids. In Lowe, A. D. (Ed.) Perspectives in aphid biology.—Bull. entomol. Soc. N.Z. 2, 40–51.Google Scholar
Eastop, V. F. & Banks, C. J. (1970). Suspected insecticide resistance mechanism in the peach-potato aphid.—Nature, Lond. 225, 970–971.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. S. (1965). On the use of gut characters to determine the origin of migrating aphids.—Ann. appl. Biol. 55, 485–494.Google Scholar
Elliott, W. M. (1969). Migration of the green peach aphid from peach in Essex County.—Proc. ent. Soc. Ont. 99, 69–72.Google Scholar
Fisken, A. G. (1959). Factors affecting the spread of aphid-borne viruses in potato in eastern Scotland. I. Overwintering of potato aphids, particularly Myzus persicae (Sulzer).—Ann. appl. Biol. 47, 264–273.Google Scholar
Gillette, C. P. & Taylor, E. P. (1908). A few orchard plant lice.—Bull. Colo. St. Univ. agric. Exp. Stn no. 133, 48 pp.Google Scholar
Hille Ris Lambers, D. (1952). Über Myzus persicae Sulzer.—Beitr. Ent. 2, 119–121.Google Scholar
Hille Ris Lambers, D. (1955). Potato aphids and virus diseases in the Netherlands.—Ann. appl. Biol. 42, 355–360.Google Scholar
Meier, W. & Keller, E. R. (1955). Bericht über das Auftreten von Kartoffelblattläusen im Jahre 1954.—Mitt. schweiz. Landw. 3, 57–62.Google Scholar
Stroyan, H. L. G. (1952). Aphid technique for advisory entomologists.—Occ. Notes Minist. Agric. Fish. Fd, Conf. advis. ent. no. 8, 8 pp.Google Scholar
Van Emden, H. F., Eastop, V. F., Hughes, R. D. & Way, M. J. (1969). The ecology of Myzus persicae.—A. Rev. Ent. 14, 197–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar