Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:12:00.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BIOSYSTEMATICS OF THE GENUS EUXOA (LEPIDOPTERA: NOCTUIDAE): XIV. EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE ON FEMALE CALLING BEHAVIOR AND TEMPORAL PARTITIONING IN THREE SIBLING SPECIES OF THE DECLARATA GROUP

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

P. E. A. Teal  and
J. R. Byers
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The calling behavior of females of three interfertile sibling species of Euxoa was studied in the laboratory at 20°, 15°, 10°, and 5 °C. At 20 °C the calling posture of E. campestris and E. rockburnei differs from that of E. declarata. However, with decreasing temperatures the calling posture of both campestris and rockburnei becomes indistinguishable from that of declarata. The pattern and duration of calling bouts was similar in all three species and at all four temperatures. Calling occurred progressively earlier in scotophase as temperature decreased but temporal separation between the calling periods of the three species is maintained at all temperatures above the threshold for mating activity. This confirms that temporal separation of mating persists over the range of temperature normally encountered in nature and strengthens the evidence that species-specific rhythms of mating activity are largely responsible for maintaining reproductive isolation between sympatric populations of these species.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 112 , Issue 2 , 01 February 1980 , pp. 113 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1980

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

Byers, J. R. and Hinks, C. F.. 1978. Biosystematics of the genus Euxoa (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae). XI. Mating discrimination between three closely related species of the declarata group. Can. J. Zool. 56: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardé, R. T., Comeau, A., Baker, T. C., and Roelofs, W. L.. 1975. Moth mating periodicity: Temperature regulates the circadian gate. Experientia 31: 1981–1987.Google ScholarPubMed
Dreisig, H. 1976. Phase shifting the circadian rhythms of nocturnal insects by temperature changes. Physiol. Ent. 1: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardwick, D. F. 1973. A synopsis of the albipennis-lillooet-declarata series of the genus Euxoa (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) with descriptions of a new species and a new subspecies. Can. Ent. 105: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardwick, D. F. and Lefkovitch, L. P.. 1973. Species separation in the declarata group of the genus Euxoa, a computer analysis based on structural characters. Can. Ent. 105: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinks, C. F. and Byers, J. R.. 1976. Biosystematics of the genus Euxoa (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). V. Rearing procedures and life cycles of 36 species. Can. Ent. 108: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, L. A. 1971. The pale western cutworm, Agrotis orthogonia Morrison (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae): A review of research. Quaest. ent. 7: 1981–1987.Google Scholar
Marks, R. J. 1976. Female sex pheromone release and timing of male flight in the red bollworm, Diparopsis castanea Hmps. (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), measured by pheromone traps. Bull. ent. Res. 66: 1981–1987.Google Scholar
Ohbayashi, N., Yushima, T., Noguchi, H., and Tamaki, Y.. 1973. Time of mating and sex pheromone production and release of Spodoptera litura (F.) (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae). Kontyû 41: 1981–1987.Google Scholar
Sanders, C. J. and Lucuik, G. S.. 1972. Factors affecting calling by female eastern spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 104: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorey, H. H. 1974. Environmental and physiological control of insect sex pheromone behavior. pp. 62–80. in Birch, M. C. (Ed.), Pheromones Am. Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
Shorey, H. H. 1976 a. Animal communication by pheromones. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Shorey, H. H. 1976 b. The adaptiveness of pheromone communication. Proc. XV int. Congr. Ent. (Washington). pp. 294–307.Google Scholar
Sower, L. L., Shorey, H. H., and Gaston, L. K.. 1970. Sex pheromones of noctuid moths. XXI. Light:dark cycle regulation and light inhibition of sex pheromone release by females of Trichoplusia ni. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 63: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sower, L. L., Gaston, L. K., and Shorey, H. H.. 1971. Sex pheromones of noctuid moths. XXVI. Female release rate, male response threshold, and communication distance for Trichoplusia ni. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sower, L. L., Kaae, R. S., and Shorey, H. H.. 1973. Sex pheromones of Lepidoptera. XLI. Factors limiting potential distance of sex pheromone communication in Trichoplusia ni. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 66: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swier, S. R., Rings, R. W., and Musick, G. J.. 1977. Age-related calling behavior of the black cutworm, Agrotis ipsilon. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 70: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teal, P. E. A., Byers, J. R., and Philogène, B. J. R.. 1978. Differences in the calling behavior of three interfertile sibling species of Euxoa (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 71: 1981–1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar