Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:05:27.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE EPIPHYSIS OF THE GYPSY MOTH, LYMANTRIA DISPAR (LEPIDOPTERA: LYMANTRIIDAE): STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

T. M. ODell ,
K. S. Shields ,
V. C. Mastro  and
T. J. Kring
T. M. ODell
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture
K. S. Shields
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture
V. C. Mastro
Affiliation:
United States Department of Agriculture
T. J. Kring
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The external structure, cellular structure, and function of the tibial epiphysis of the gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.), are described. Scanning electron micrographs and histological preparations indicate that the epiphysis of the male gypsy moth is an efficient antennal comb, but behavioral studies indicate it is not required for either precopulatory stimulation or for orientation to sex pheromones. The acanthae covering the inner surface of the epiphysis appear to have only a mechanical function.

Résumé

La structure externe, la structure cellulaire et la fonction de l'épiphyse tibiale de la spongieuse, Lymantria dispar (L.), font l'objet de descriptions. Des micrographies en MEB et des préparations histologiques indiquent que l'épiphyse du mâle de la spongieuse est un peigne antennaire efficace, mais des études comportementales montrent qu'il n'est pas nécessaire, soit pour la stimulation pré-copulatoire, soit pour l'orientation aux phéromones sexuelles. Les acanthae couvrant la surface interne de l'épiphyse semblent n'avoir qu'une fonction mécanique.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 114 , Issue 8 , August 1982 , pp. 751 - 761
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1982

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

Birch, M. C. 1974. Pheromones. North-Holland, Amsterdam. 495 pp.Google Scholar
Callahan, P. S. 1969. The exoskeleton of the corn earworm moth, Heliothis zea (Lep.: Noctuidae), with special reference to the sensilla as polytubular dielectric arrays. Univ. Ga. Res. Bull. 54. 105 pp.Google Scholar
Callahan, P. S. 1975. Insect antennae with special reference to the mechanism of scent detection and the evolution of sensilla. Int. J. Insect Morphol. Embryol. 4: 381–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callahan, P. S. and Carlysle, T.C.. 1971. A function of the epiphysis on the foreleg of the corn earworm moth, Heliothis zea. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 309–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comstock, J. H. 1920. An Introduction to Entomology. Comstock, Ithaca, N.Y.1044 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, S. A. 1973. Concentration effects and the response of Nemeritis canescens to a secretion of its host. J. Insect Physiol. 19: 2119–2128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbush, E. H. and Fernald, C.H.. 1896. The gypsy moth, Porthetria dispar (Linn.). Wright and Potter, Boston. 495 pp.Google Scholar
Grant, G. G. 1976. Courtship behavior of a phycitid moth, Vitula edmandsae. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 64: 347–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, J. R. and Roelofs, W.L.. 1978. Sustained-flight tunnel for measuring insect responses to windborne sex pheromones. J. Chem. Ecol. 4: 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagaraja, H., Dharmadhikari, P.R., and Rao, V.P.. 1968. A comparative study of the external morphology of Lymantria obfuscata (Wlk.) in India and L. dispar (L.) in the USA. Bull. ent. Res. 59: 105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, A. G. and Richards, P.A.. 1979. The cuticular protuberances of insects. Int. J. Insect Morphol. Embryol. 8: 143–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar