Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:06:45.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

TAXONOMIC STATUS OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST: MORPHOMETRIC COMPARISONS OF MELANOPLUS SPRETUS (WALSH) WITH SOLITARY AND MIGRATORY MELANOPLUS SANGUINIPES (F.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Jeffrey A. Lockwood
Jeffrey A. Lockwood
Affiliation:
Department of Plant, Soil and Insect Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, USA82071
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Morphometric analysis of 16 body measurements of migratory and solitary Melanoplus sanguinipes (F.) and M. spretus (Walsh) was used to determine if M. spretus was, in fact, the migratory phase of M. sanguinipes. Migratory M. sanguinipes was found to be more similar to its own solitary phase than to M. spretus. Melanoplus spretus resembled migratory M. sanguinipes, but in 14 comparisons M. spretus differed significantly from both solitary and migratory M. sanguinipes. Despite the potential for environmental variation obscuring differences in morphology, the divergent morphometric characters of M. spretus and the phases of M. sanguinipes appear to justify the status of M. spretus as a true species.

Résumé

Des analyses morphométriques basées sur 16 dimensions corporelles de Melanoplus sanguinipes (F.) et de M. spretus (Walsh) ont permis de déterminer si M. spretus est en fait la phase migratoire de M. sanguinipes. Des migrateurs de M. sanguinipes se sont avérés plus semblables à des copnspécifiques solitaires, qu’à des M. spretus. Melanoplus spretus ressemble à des migrateurs de M. sanguinipes, mais 14 critères de comparaison indiquent que M. spretus diffère significativement aussi bien des solitaires que des migrateurs de M. sanguinipes. Bien que la variation environnementale puisse obscurcir les différences morphologiques, les divergences morphométriques entre M. spretus et les phases de M. sanguinipes semblent justifier la distinction de M. spretus comme une espèce à part entière.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 121 , Issue 12 , December 1989 , pp. 1103 - 1109
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1989

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

Barnes, O.L., Nerney, N.J., and McLellan, C.W.. 1953. Results of tests during 1953 on the effect of food plants on the morphology, development, and phase of the lesser migratory grasshopper (Melanoplus mexicanus) in Arizona. U.S.D.A. Div. Cereal and Forage Insect Investigations, Spec. Rep. Z-13.Google Scholar
Brett, C.H. 1947. Interrelated effects of food, temperature, and humidity on the development of the lesser migratory grasshopper, Melanoplus mexicanus mexicanus (Saussure) (Orthoptera). Oklahoma Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. T-26.Google Scholar
Capinera, J.L., and Sechrist, T.S.. 1982. Grasshoppers (Acrididae) of Colorado: identification, biology and management. Colorado State Univ. Exp. Sta. Bull. 584S.Google Scholar
Dirsh, V.M. 1953. Morphometrical studies on phases of the Desert Locust (Schistocerca gregaria Forskal). Antilocust Bull. 16.Google Scholar
Faure, J.C. 1933. The phases of the Rocky Mountain locust Melanoplus mexicanus (Saussure). J. econ. Ent. 26: 706–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frison, T.H. 1927. A list of insect types in the collection of the Illinois State Natural History Survey and the University of Illinois. Bull. Illinois Nat. Hist. Surv. 16: 137–309.Google Scholar
Gurney, A.B. 1949. Melanoplus rugglesi, a migratory grasshopper from the Great Basin of North America (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 51: 267–272.Google Scholar
Gurney, A.B. 1953. Grasshopper Glacier of Montana and its relation to long-distance flights of grasshoppers. A. Rep. Smithson. Inst. 1952: 305–326.Google Scholar
Gurney, A.B., and Brooks, A.R.. 1959. Grasshoppers of the Mexicanus group, genus Melanoplus (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Proc. U.S. Natn. Mus. 110 (3416).Google Scholar
Hebard, M. 1917. Notes on Mexican Melanopli (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 67: 251–275.Google Scholar
Hebard, M. 1927. Fixation of the single types of species of Orthoptera described by Cyrus Thomas. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 79: 1–11.Google Scholar
Hebard, M. 1934. Notes on the Orthoptera from northwestern Minnesota. Ent. News 45: 103–106.Google Scholar
International Locust Conference. 1937. Proceedings of the 4th International Locust Conference, Cairo, 1936.Google Scholar
Scudder, S.H. 1878. Brief notice of the American species of Melanoplus found west of the 117th meridian. Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. 19: 286–290.Google Scholar
Scudder, S.H. 1897. Revision of the Orthoptera group Melanopli (Acrididae) with special reference to the North American forms. Proc. U.S. Nat. Hist. Mus. 20: 1–421.Google Scholar
Shapiro, A.M., and Porter, A.H.. 1989. The lock-and-key hypothesis: evolutionary and biosystematic interpretation of insect genitalia. A. Rev. Ent. 34: 231–246.Google Scholar
Steele, R.G.D., and Torrie, J.H.. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, a Biometrical Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. 1865. Insects injurious to vegetation in Illinois. Trans. Illinois State Agric. Soc. 5: 401–468.Google Scholar
Uvarov, B.P. 1977. Grasshoppers and Locusts, a Handbook of General Acridology. Vol. 2, Behaviour, Ecology, Biogeography, Population Dynamics. Centre Overseas Pest Research, London.Google Scholar
Van Horn, D. 1965. Variations in size and phallic morphology among populations of Melanoplus dodgei (Thomas) in the Colorado Front Range (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Trans. ent. Soc. Am. 91: 95–119.Google Scholar