Advertisement

International Journal of Tropical Insect Science

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 168–175 | Cite as

The effect of host larvae on three Psyttalia species (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), parasitoids of fruit-infesting flies (Diptera: Tephritidae)

  • M. K. Billah
  • S. Kimani-Njogu
  • W. A. Overholt
  • R. A. Wharton
  • D. D. Wilson
  • M. A. Cobblah
Article

Abstract

Three species of fruit fly parasitoids, Psyttalia concolor (Szépligeti), Psyttalia cosyrae (Wilkinson) and Psyttalia lounsburyi (Silvestri) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) were reared on different host larvae to determine the effects of host species, size and colour on parasitoid development. Ovipositor, ovipositor sheath and hind tibia lengths were found to be different for progenies from preferred and non-preferred host larvae. Ratios of ovipositor-tibia and ovipositor sheath-tibia showed no difference when P. concolor was reared on a bigger host (Ceratitis cosyra (Walker) (Diptera: Tephritidae), whereas rearing P. cosyrae on a smaller host (C. capitata (Wiedemann) showed significant differences. Comparison of the linear measurements, ratios and number of flagellomeres of parasitoids reared on preferred hosts, separated the species into their natural groupings. When reared on a different-coloured host, P. lounsburyi lost its dark markings but other characters remained unchanged. Morphometric analysis also indicated differences between parasitoids reared on preferred host larvae and those reared on non-preferred host larvae. Rearing parasitoids on larvae other than their preferred hosts resulted in colour and size changes, and thus, these characters alone were not reliable for the identification of parasitoids. This is especially important in post-release sampling surveys to ascertain establishment of the parasitoids in new environments where they may adapt to new host species.

Key words

Psyttalia Ceratitis parasitoids fruit flies host larvae flagellomeres 

Résumé

Trois espèces de parasitoïdes, Psyttalia concolor (Szépligeti), Psyttalia cosyrae (Wilkinson) et Psyttalia lounsburyi (Silvestri) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) de mouche des fruits ont été élevées sur différents hôtes larvaires afin de déterminer l’incidence des espèces d’hôtes, leur taille et couleur, sur le développement des parasitoïdes. La longueur des ovipositeurs, des étuis d’ovipositeur et des tibias postérieurs des descendants est différente selon qu’ils ont été élevés sur des hôtes préférés ou non préférés. Les rapports ovipositeur-tibia et étui d’ovipositeur-tibia de P. concolor ne sont pas modifiés sur le plus gros hôte (Ceratitis cosyra (Walker) (Diptera: Tephritidae)), alors que ceux de P. cosyrae sont significativement differénts sur le plus petit hôte (C. capitata (Wiedemann)). La comparaison des longueurs, des ratios et du nombre de flagellomères des parasitoïdes élevés sur leurs hôtes préférés permet de les séparer facilement. Par contre, lorsque P. lounsburyi est élevé sur un hôte de couleur différente, il perd ses tâches noires mais garde les autres caractères inchangés. Une analyse morphométrique indique également des différences entre les parasitoïdes élevés sur des hôtes préférés ou non préférés. Nos résultats montrent que l’élevage des parasitoïdes sur des larves non préférées induit des changements de couleur et de taille, et que ces caractères seuls ne sont pas fiables pour l’identification des espèces. Cela apparaît particulièrement important dans le cadre d’enquêtes réalisées après des lâchers afin d’évaluer l’établissement des parasitoïdes dans de nouveaux environnements lorsqu’ils doivent s’adapter à de nouveaux hôtes.

Mots clés

Psyttalia Ceratitis parasitoïdes mouche des fruits hôte larvaire flagellomères 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bianchi R. A. and Krauss N. H. (1937) Fruit fly investigations in East Africa. Hawaiian Planters Record 41, 299–306.Google Scholar
  2. Billah, M. K. (2004) Biosystematic studies of Psyttalia species (Hymenoptera: Braconidae): Parasitoids attacking fruit-infesting flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Africa. PhD thesis, University of Ghana, Legon-Accra. 236 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Clausen C. P. (1978) Tephritidae (Trypetidae, Trupaeidae), pp. 320–325. Introduced Parasites and Predators of Arthropod Pests and Weeds: a World View (Edited by C. P. Clausen). USD A Handbook, 480 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Clausen C. P., Clancy D. W. and Chock Q. C. (1965) Biological control of the Oriental fruit fly and other fruit flies in Hawaii. USDA Technical Bulletin, No. 1322.Google Scholar
  5. Eben A., Benrey B., Sivinski J. and Aluja M. (2000) Host species and host plants effects on preference and performance of Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Environmental Entomology 29, 87–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fischer M. (1958) Ueber dei Variabilitaet von Toxono-misch wichtigen merkmalen bei Opius concolor Szepl. (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Entomophaga 3, 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fischer M. (1972) Hymenoptera: Braconidae (Opiinae I). Das Tierreich 91, 1–620.Google Scholar
  8. Fischer M. (1987) Hymenoptera: Opiinae III - äthiopische, orientalische, australische und ozeanische Region. Das Tierreich 104, 1–734.Google Scholar
  9. Fullaway D. T. (1915) Report of the work of the insectary. Report to the Board of Commissioners for Agriculture and Forestry. Division of Entomology Bulletin 3, 148–153.Google Scholar
  10. Godfray H. C. J. (1994) Parasitoids: Behavioural and Evolutionary Ecology. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. 473 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Hooper G. H. S. (1987) Application of quality control procedures for large scale rearing of Mediterranean fruit fly. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 44, 161–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kimani-Njogu S. W., Trostle M. K., Wharton R. A., Woolley J. B. and Raspi A. (2001) Biosystematics of the Psyttalia concolor species complex (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Opiinae): the identity of populations attacking Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in coffee in Kenya. Biological Control 20, 167–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mohamed S. A., Overholt W. A., Wharton R. A., Lux S. A. and Eltoum E. M. (2003) Host specificity of Psyttalia cosyrae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and the effect of different host species on parasitoid fitness. Biological Control 28, 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ode P. J. and Heinz K. M. (2002) Host-size-dependent sex ratio theory and improving mass-reared parasitoid sex ratios. Biological Control 24, 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Salt G. (1940) Experimental studies in insect parasitism. VII. The effects of different hosts on the parasite Trichogramma evanescens Westwood. Proceedings of the Royal Entomological Society of London 15A, 81–95.Google Scholar
  16. SAS Institute Inc. (2001) SAS/STAT® User’s Guide, Version 8.2. Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  17. Silvestri F. (1914) Report of an expedition to Africa in search of the natural enemies of fruit flies, Territory of Hawaiian Board for Agriculture and Forestry. Division of Entomology Bulletini No. 3. Translation of 1913 report in Italian, 176 pp.Google Scholar
  18. Sivinski J., Vulinec K. and Aluja M. (2001) Ovipositor length in a guild of parasitoid (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) attacking Anastrepha species fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Southern Mexico. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 94, 886–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sokal R. R. and Rohlf F. J. (1995) Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, 3rd Edition. W.H. Freeman and Company, USA. 887 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Wharton R. A. (1987) Changes in nomenclature and classification of some opiine Braconidae (Hymenoptera). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 89, 61–73.Google Scholar
  21. Wharton R. A. (1989) Control; classical biological control of fruit-infesting Tephritidae, pp. 303–313. In Fruit Flies; their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. World Crop Pests, 3(B) (Edited by A. S. Robinson and G. Hooper). Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  22. Wharton R. A. (1997a) Generic relationships of opiine Braconidae (Hymenoptera) parasitic on fruit-infesting Tephritidae (Diptera). Contributions of the American Entomological Institute 30, 1–53.Google Scholar
  23. Wharton R. A. (1997b) Subfamily Opiinae, pp. 378–395 Manual of the New World Genera of the Family Braconidae (Hymenoptera) (Edited by R. A. Wharton, P. M. Marsh and M. J. Sharkey). Special publication of The International Society of Hymenopterists. No. 1.Google Scholar
  24. Wharton R. A. and Gilstrap F. E. (1983) Key to and status of opiine braconid (Hymenoptera) parasitoids used in biological control of Ceratitis and Dacus s.l (Diptera: Tephritidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 76, 721–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. White, I. M. and Elson-Harris, M. M. (1992) Fruit flies of economic significance: Their Identification and Bionomics. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, 602 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICIPE 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. K. Billah
    • 1
    • 5
  • S. Kimani-Njogu
    • 2
  • W. A. Overholt
    • 3
  • R. A. Wharton
    • 4
  • D. D. Wilson
    • 5
  • M. A. Cobblah
    • 5
  1. 1.International Centre of Insect Physiology and EcologyNairobiKenya
  2. 2.Species 2000 ProjectUniversity of ReadingUK
  3. 3.Institute of Food and Agricultural SciencesUniversity of FloridaUSA
  4. 4.Department of EntomologyTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  5. 5.Department of ZoologyUniversity of GhanaLegon-AccraGhana

Personalised recommendations