9 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Does urbanization explain differences in interactions between an insect herbivore and its natural enemies and mutualists?
Urbanization can alter the composition of arthropod communities. However, little is known about how urbanization affects ecological interactions. Using experimental colonies of the black bean aphid Aphis fabae Scopoli reared on Vicia faba L, we asked if patterns of predator-prey, host-parasitoid and ant-aphid mutualisms varied along an urbanization gradient across a large town in southern England. We recorded the presence of naturally occurring predators, parasitoid wasps and mutualistic ants together with aphid abundance. We examined how biotic (green areas and plant richness) and abiotic features (impervious surfaces and distance to town center) affected (1) aphid colony size, (2) the likelihood of finding predators, mutualistic ants and aphid mummies (indicating the presence of parasitoids), and (3) how the interplay among these factors affected patterns of parasitoid attack, predator abundance, mutualistic interactions and aphid abundance. The best model to predict aphid abundance was the number of mutualistic ants attending the colonies. Aphid predators responded negatively to both the proportion of impervious surfaces and to the number of mutualistic ants farming the colonies, and positively to aphid population size, whereas parasitized aphids were found in colonies with higher numbers of aphids and ants. The number of mutualistic ants attending was positively associated with aphid colony size and negatively with the number of aphid predators. Our findings suggest that for insect-natural enemy interactions, urbanization may affect some groups, while not influencing others, and that local effects (mutualists, host plant presence) will also be key determinants of how urban ecological communities are formed
Effects of host switching on gypsy moth ( Lymantria dispar (L.)) under field conditions
Effects of various single and two species diets on the performance of gypsy moth ( Lymantria dispar (L.)) were studied when this insect was reared from hatch to population on intact host trees in the field. The tree species used for this study were red oak ( Quercus rubra L.), white oak (Q. alba L.), bigtooth aspen ( Populus grandidentata Michaux), and trembling aspen ( P. tremuloides Michaux). These are commonly available host trees in the Lake States region. The study spanned two years and was performed at two different field sites in central Michigan. Conclusions drawn from this study include: (1) Large differences in gypsy moth growth and survival can occur even among diet sequences composed of favorable host species. (2) Larvae that spent their first two weeks feeding on red oak performed better during this time period than larvae on all other host species in terms of mean weight, mean relative growth rate (RGR), and mean level of larval development, while larvae on a first host of bigtooth aspen were ranked lowest in terms of mean weight, RGR, and level of larval development. (3) Combination diets do not seem to be inherently better or worse than diets composed of only a single species; rather, insect performance was affected by the types of host species eaten and the time during larval development that these host species were consumed instead of whether larvae ate single species diets or mixed species diets. (4) In diets composed of two host species, measures of gypsy moth performance are affected to different extents in the latter part of the season by the two different hosts; larval weights and development rates show continued effects of the first host fed upon while RGRs, mortality, and pupal weights are affected strongly by the second host type eaten. (5) Of the diets investigated in this study, early feeding on red oak followed by later feeding on an aspen, particularly trembling aspen, is most beneficial to insects in terms of attaining high levels of performance throughout their lives.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/47802/1/442_2004_Article_BF00323144.pd