Über die postlarvale Entwicklung von Flöhen (Insecta, Siphonaptera), unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der sogenannten „Flügelanlagen“

  • Hans-Walter Poenicke

Abstract

Lateral appendages on the mesothorax of flea pupae, regarded to be “wing buds” by Sharif, have been found in species of the Ceratophylloidea investigated by other authors and me, but not in the Pulicidae. The appendages become basal parts of the mesepimeron which speaks against their wing character. Ecological data are given.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Bacot, A.: A study of the bionomics of the common rat fleas and other species associated with human habitations, with special reference to the influence of temperature and humidity at various periods of the life history of the insects. J. Hyg. (Lond.) Plague suppl. 3 (1914).Google Scholar
  2. Beier, M.: Suctoria. In: KPKENTHAL, Handbuch der Zoologie. Insecta 2, S. 19992039. Berlin 1937.Google Scholar
  3. Bruce, W. N.: Studies on the biological requirements of the cat flea. Ann. ent. Soc. Amer. 41, 346–352 (1948).Google Scholar
  4. Buxton, P. A.: Experiments with mice and fleas. Parasitology 39, 119–124 (1948).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Edney, E.B.: Laboratory studies on the bionomics of the rat fleas, Xenopsylla brasiliensis, Baker and X. cheopis,_ Rothsch. I. Bull. ent. Res. 35, 399–416 (1945).Google Scholar
  6. Edney, E.B.: Laboratory studies on the bionomics of the rat fleas, Xenopsylla brasiliensis. Baker and X. cheopis, Rothsch. II. Bull. ent. Res. 38, 263–280 (1947a).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edney, E.B.: Laboratory studies on the bionomics of the rat fleas, Xenopsylla brasiliensis, Baker and X. cheopis, Rothsch. III. Bull. ent. Res. 38, 389–404 (1947b).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elbel, R. E.: Comparative studies on the larvae of certain species of fleas (Syphonaptera). J. Parasit. 37, 119–128 (1951).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Geigy. R., and P. Suter: Zur Copulation der Flöhe. Rev. suisse Zool. 67, 206–210 (1960).Google Scholar
  10. Heymons, R.: Die systematische Stellung der Puliciden. Zool. Anz. 22, 223–240 (1899).Google Scholar
  11. Holland, G.P.: Evolution, classification, and host relationships of Siphonaptera. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 9, 123–146 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hsrka, K., and J. Dosxocil: Influence of relative atmospheric humidity on the survival of bat fleas (Aphaniptera, Ischnopsyllidae). Öas. ces. Spol. Entomol. 58, 111–116 (1961).Google Scholar
  13. Ioff, I. G.: Die Fragen der Ökologie der Flöhe im Zusammenhang mit ihrer epidemologischen Bedeutung. Landes Vlg. Ordzhonikidze, Pjatigorsk (1941).Google Scholar
  14. Karandikar, K., R., and D.M. Muxsxi: Life history and bionomics of the cat flea Ctenocephalides felis Bouché. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 49, 169–177 (1950).Google Scholar
  15. Klein, J.-M.: Contribution à l’étude morphologique externe des larves des puces. Bull. Soc. Ent. France 69, 174–196 (1964).Google Scholar
  16. Lass, M.: Beiträge zur Kenntnis des histologisch-anatomischen Baues des weiblichen Hundeflohes. Z. wiss. Zool. 79, 73–181 (1905).Google Scholar
  17. Meadbriggs, A.R.: Breeding of the rabbit flea, Spilopsyllus cuniculi (Dale): Requirement of a `factor’ from a pregnant rabbit for ovarian maturation. Nature (Lond.) 187, 1136–1137 (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mellanby, K.: The influence of temperature and humidity on the pupation of Xenopsylla cheopis. Bull. ent. Res. 24, 197–202 (1933).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peus, F.: Über den Krähenfloh, Ceratophyllus rossittensis Dampf, nebst Bemerkungen über die Wechselbeziehungen zwischen Vogelfloh und Vogel. Z. Parasitenk. 11, 371–390 (1940).Google Scholar
  20. Peus, F.: Aphaniptera, Flöhe. In: E. MARTINI, Lehrbuch der medizinischen Entomologie, 4. Aufl., 161–181. Jena 1952.Google Scholar
  21. Peus, F.: Flöhe. Die Neue Brehm-Bücherei, 98 (1953).Google Scholar
  22. Richards, A. G.: The Integument of Arthropods. Minneapolis 1951.Google Scholar
  23. Romeis, B.: Mikroskopische Technik. München 1948.Google Scholar
  24. Rothschild, M., and B. Ford: Breeding of the rabbit flea (Spilopsyllus cuniculi Dale). Nature (Lond.) 201, 103–104 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sharif, M.: On the presence of wing buds in the pupa of Aphaniptera. Parasitology 27, 461–464 (1935).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sharif, M.: On the internal anat. of the larva of the rat-flea (Nosopsyllus fasciatus). Phil. Trans. B 227, 465–538 (1937a).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sharif, M.: On the life history and the biology of rat-flea Nosopsyllus fasciatus. Parasitology 29, 225–238 (1937b).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sharif, M.: Nutritional requirements of flea larvae, and their bearing on the specific distribution and host preferences of the three Indian species of Xenopsylla (Siphonaptera). Parasitology 38, 253–263 (1948a).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sharif, M.: The water relations of the larvae of X. cheopis (Siphonaptera). Parasitology 39, 148–155 (1948b).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sharif, M.: Effects of constant temperature and humidity on the development of the larvae and the pupae of the three Indian species of Xenopsylla (Insecta, Siphonaptera). Phil. Trans. B 233, 581–635 (1949).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sikes, E.: Notes on breeding fleas, with reference to humidity and feeding. Parasitology 23, 243–249 (1931).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. SNODGRASS, R. E.: The skeletal anatomy of fleas (Siphonaptera). Smithson. Misc. Coll. 104, Nr 18 (1946).Google Scholar
  33. Tower, W. L.: The origin and development of the wings of Coleoptera. Zool. Jb., Abt. 2, 17, 517–567 (1903).Google Scholar
  34. Wagner, J.: Aphaniptera. In: Bronns Klassen und Ordnungen des Tierreiches, V, Abt. 3, 13, 1 — 44.Google Scholar
  35. Wasserburger, H. J.: Beiträge zur Histologie und mikroskopischen Anatomie von Xenopsylla cheopis Rothschild. Dtsch. ent. Z., N.F. 8, 373–414 (1961).Google Scholar
  36. Weber, H.: Grundriß der Insektenkunde, 3. Aufl. Stuttgart 1954.Google Scholar
  37. Weidner, H.: Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Biologie des Fledermausflohes Ischnopsyllus hexactenus Kol. Z. Parasitenk. 9, 543–548 (1937).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhovtvi, I., F., and G. J. Vasilev: Rodent self-defleaing. Dokl. Irkutsk Protivochumnogo Inst. 4, 150–160 (1962).Google Scholar
  39. Zwolfer, W.: Methoden zur Regulierung von Temperatur und Luftfeuchtigkeit. Z. angew. Entomol. 19, 498 (1932).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans-Walter Poenicke
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut für Angewandte ZoologieFreien Universität BerlinDeutschland
  2. 2.UntergrombachDeutschland

Personalised recommendations