Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-j4qg9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-11T23:06:56.851Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A SEROLOGICAL COMPARISON OF PISSODES STROBI AND P. APPROXIMATUS (COLEOPTERA: CURCULIONIDAE)12

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

David J. Peckham
David J. Peckham
Affiliation:
Biological Sciences Group, University of Connecticut, Storrs
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The serological relationships of Pissodes strobi (Peck) and P. approximatus Hopkins were examined using turbidimetric and immunodiffusion analyses. Hylobius pales Hbst. was used for heterologous comparisons. When turbidimetric analyses were performed using anti-strobi sera, heterologous reactions with P. approximatus were stronger than homologous reactions. Moreover, immunodiffusion tests substantiated this. These results appear to have broken a cardinal rule of serology: that hererologous reactions do not exceed homologous reactions in magnitude.These results could he due to a simple quantitative variation in the antigen extracts or to possible cross-reactivity between antigenically similar proteins. Another possibility is that the two populations are not separate species. Evidence obtained in this study seems to be in accord with cytological evidence obtained hi previous studies and does not support the designation of P. approximatus as a valid species.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 101 , Issue 1 , January 1969 , pp. 78 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1969

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

Böving, A. G. 1929. Taxonomic characters for the identification of the mature larvae of Pissodes strobi (Peck) and Pissodes approximatus Hopkins (Fam. Curculionidae). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 31: 182–186.Google Scholar
Boyden, A. A. 1926. The precipitin reaction in the study of animal relationships. Biol. Bull. 50: 73–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyden, A. A., and DeFalco, R. J.. 1943. Report on the use of the photronreflectometer in serological comparisons. Physiol. Zool. 16: 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnegan, R. J. 1958. The pine weevil, Pissodes approximatus Hopk., in Southern Ontario. Can. Ent. 90: 348–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folin, O., and Ciocalteau, V.. 1927. On tyrosine and tryptophane determinations in proteins. J. biol. Chem. 73: 627–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godwin, P. A., and ODell, T. M.. 1967. Experimental hybridization of Pissodes strobi and P. approximatus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60: 55–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, A. D. 1911. Contributions toward a monograph of the bark-weevils of the genus Pissodes. U.S. Dep. Agric. Entomol. Bur. Bull. 20 (Tech. Ser.), part 1.Google Scholar
Laufer, H. 1962. Macromolecular patterns in development and evolution, pp. 171–190. In Leone, Charles A. (ed.), Taxonomic biochemistry and serology. The Ronald Press Co., New York.Google Scholar
Leone, C. A., Leonard, A. B., and Pryor, C.. 1955. Studies of the agar-plate precipitin test. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 37: 477–497.Google Scholar
Libby, R. L. 1938. The photronreflectometer — an instrument for the measurement of turbid systems. J. Immunol. 34: 71–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manna, G. K., and Smith, S. G.. 1959. Chromosomal polymorphism and inter-relationships among bark weevils of the genus Pissodes Germar. The Nucleus 2: 179–208.Google Scholar
*Ouchterlony, O. 1948. Antigen-antibody reactions in gels. Arkiv. Kemi. Min. och Geol. 26B: 1–9.Google Scholar
Plummer, C. C., and Pillsbury, A. E.. 1929. The white pine weevil in New Hampshire. New Hamp. Exp. Stn Bull. 247.Google Scholar
Smith, S. G. 1962. Cytogenetic pathways in beetle speciation. Can. Ent. 94: 941–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar