Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:59:12.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taste cell responses of stem-borer larvae Chilo partellus (Swinhoe), Eldana saccharina Wlk. and Maruca testulalis (Geyer) to plant substances

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

C. J. Den Otter  and
H. M. Kahoro
C. J. Den Otter
Affiliation:
The International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772, Nairobi, Kenya
H. M. Kahoro
Affiliation:
The International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), P.O. Box 30772, Nairobi, Kenya
Get access

Abstract

Eleetrophysiological recordings from taste sensilla of larvae of Chilo partellus (Swinhoe), Eldana saccharina Wlk. and Maruca testulalis (Geyer) during stimulation with various plant substances revealed that in the medial and lateral maxillary sensilla styloconica of each of these three species a NaCl, water and sucrose sensitive cell is present. In the medial styloconic sensilla of C. partellus, an additional chlorogenic acid sensitive cell occurs. Chilo partellus and E. saccharina appeared to be more sensitive to sucrose than M. testulalis. In all three species, the lateral sensilla styloconica are more responsive to sucrose and less responsive to NaCl than the medial ones.

Keywords

Electrophysiologytastestem-borer larvae
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 4 , Special Issue 1-2: Crop-Borers and Emerging Strategies for their Control , June 1983 , pp. 153 - 157
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1983

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

REFERENCES

Den Otter, C. J. and Thomas, G. (1979) Olfactory preference in insects: a synthesis of behaviour and electrophysiology. In Preference Behaviour and Chemoreception (Edited by Kroeze, J. H. A.), pp. 171–182. Information Retrieval Ltd., London.Google Scholar
Ishikawa, S., Hirao, T. and Arai, N. (1969) Chemosensory basis of host plant selection in the silkworm. Ent. exp. Appl. 12, 544–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, W.-C. (1976) Mouth parts and receptors involved in feeding behaviour and sugar perception in the African armyworm, Spodoptera exempta (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). Symp. Biol. Hung. 16, 139–151.Google Scholar
Schoonhoven, L. M. (1968) Chemosensory basis of host plant selection. A. Rev. Ent. 13, 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoonhoven, L. M. (1977) Insect chemosensory responses to plant and animal hosts. In Chemical Control of Insect Behavior. Theory and Application (Edited by Shorey, H. H. and McKelvey, J. J. Jr), pp. 7–14. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Woodhead, S. and Bernays, E. A. (1978) The chemical basis of resistance of Sorghum bicolor to attack by Locusta migrutoria. Ent. exp. Appl. 24, 123–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar