Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:20:35.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

HOW DO LADYBIRDS [COLEOMEGILLA MACULATA LENGI (COLEOPTERA: COCCINELLIDAE)] FEED ON GREEN LACEWING EGGS [CHRYSOPERLA RUFILABRIS (NEUROPTERA: CHRYSOPIDAE)]?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Éric Lucas
Éric Lucas
Affiliation:
Centre de recherche en horticulture, Département de phytologie, Université Laval, Sainte-Foy, Quebec, Canada G1K 7P4
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Intraguild predation, a common interaction among arthropods (Polis et al. 1989), has been investigated recently in aphidophages (Rosenheim et al. 1993; Lucas et al. 1998). Sessile stages of coccinellids, gall midges, and lacewings (eggs, moulting individuals, and pupae) were shown to be highly vulnerable to intraguild predators (Lucas et al. 1998). Several defensive mechanisms have already been described for eggs of aphidophages, including chemical protection (Eisner et al. 1996), structural protection (Canard and Duelli 1984), and behavioural avoidance through the selection by females of protected oviposition sites (E. Lucas, and J. Brodeur, unpublished data).

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 130 , Issue 4 , August 1998 , pp. 547 - 548
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1998

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

Alrouechy, K., Séméria, Y., and New, T.R.. 1984. Ecology of natural enemies. pp. 187–192in Canard, M., Semeria, Y., and New, T.R. (Eds.), Biology of Chrysopidae. Dr. W. Junk, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Canard, M., and Duelli, P.. 1984. Predatory behavior of larvae and cannibalism. pp. 92–100in Canard, M., Semeria, Y., and New, T.R. (Eds.), Biology of Chrysopidae. Dr. W. Junk, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Duelli, P., and Johnson, J.B.. 1991. Adaptive significance of the egg pedicel in green lacewings (Insecta: Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). pp. 125–134in Canard, M., Aspôck, H., and Mansell, M.W. (Eds.), Current Research in Neuropterology, Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Neuropterology, Toulouse, France.Google Scholar
Eisner, T., Attygale, A.B., Conner, W.E., Eisner, M., MacLeod, E., and Meinwald, J.. 1996. Chemical egg defense in a green lacewing (Ceraeochrysa smithi). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 93: 3280–3283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, H.E. 1981. Biology of Insect Eggs. Vol. II. Pergamon Press Ltd., Toronto, ON.Google Scholar
Lucas, E., Coderre, D., and Brodeur, J.. 1997. Instar-specific defense of Coleomegilla maculata lengi (Coccinellidae): influence on attack success of the intraguild predator Chrysoperla rufilabris (Chrysopidae). Entomophaga 42 (1/2): 3–12.Google Scholar
Lucas, E., Coderre, D., and Brodeur, J.. 1998. Intraguild predation among aphid predators: characterization and influence of extraguild prey density. Ecology. In press.Google Scholar
Polis, G.A., Myers, C.A., and Holt, R.D.. 1989. The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20: 297–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenheim, J.A., Wilhoit, L.R., and Armer, C.A.. 1993. Influence of intraguild predation among generalist insect predators on the suppression of an herbivore population. Oecologia 96: 439–449.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed