Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T04:57:36.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How could host discrimination abilities influence the structure of a parasitoid community?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 December 2008

J. van Baaren ,
C. Le Lann ,
J. Pichenot ,
J.S. Pierre ,
L. Krespi  and
Y. Outreman
J. van Baaren*
Affiliation:
UMR 1099 INRA-Agrocampus Ouest-UniversitéRennes I, Avenue du Général Leclerc, 35042 Rennes cedex, France
C. Le Lann
Affiliation:
UMR 1099 INRA-Agrocampus Ouest-UniversitéRennes I, Avenue du Général Leclerc, 35042 Rennes cedex, France
J. Pichenot
Affiliation:
UMR INRA-Agrocampus Rennes-Université de Rennes 1‘Biologie des Organismes et des Populations appliquée à la Protection des Plantes’ (BIO3P), 65, rue de Saint-Brieuc CS 84215, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France
J.S. Pierre
Affiliation:
UMR 1099 INRA-Agrocampus Ouest-UniversitéRennes I, Avenue du Général Leclerc, 35042 Rennes cedex, France
L. Krespi
Affiliation:
UMR INRA-Agrocampus Rennes-Université de Rennes 1‘Biologie des Organismes et des Populations appliquée à la Protection des Plantes’ (BIO3P), 65, rue de Saint-Brieuc CS 84215, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France
Y. Outreman
Affiliation:
UMR INRA-Agrocampus Rennes-Université de Rennes 1‘Biologie des Organismes et des Populations appliquée à la Protection des Plantes’ (BIO3P), 65, rue de Saint-Brieuc CS 84215, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France
*
*Author for correspondence Fax: 33 2 23 23 50 26 E-mail: Joan.van-baaren@univ-rennes1.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three related Aphidius parasitoid species share the same host, the grain aphid Sitobion avenae. Among this parasitoid community, Aphidius rhopalosiphi is the most abundant species in the field. Both the interspecific host discrimination of A. rhopalosiphi towards hosts parasitized by the two other species (i.e. A. avenae and A. ervi) and the interspecific host discrimination of the two other species towards hosts parasitized by A. rhopalosiphi were studied here. Results showed that females of A. rhopalosiphi and A. avenae both discriminated between unparasitized hosts and hosts parasitized by the other species. This discrimination occurred only after ovipositor insertion, suggesting the perception of an internal marker of parasitism. Likewise, females of A. rhopalosiphi and A. ervi were able to discriminate between unparasitized hosts and hosts parasitized by the other species. However, in this combination of species, recognition of parasitized hosts occurred before ovipositor insertion, through an antennal perception, suggesting the presence an external cue indicating parasitism. Hence, interspecific host discrimination in the three Aphidius species is based on internal or external cues, which are used either alone or together. Our results showed that the cues used for interspecific host discrimination depend on the specific identity of the interaction. These differences seemed strongly linked to the way the different species respond to defensive behaviours of their aphid hosts. Results are discussed in the context of optimal foraging and possible consequences for community structure.

Keywords

host parasitoid interactionsinterspecific competitionresource sharinghost discrimination costsAphidiinae
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 99 , Issue 3 , June 2009 , pp. 299 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

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

Agboka, K., Schulthess, F., Chabi-Olaye, A., Labo, I., Gounou, S. & Smith, H. (2002) Self-, intra and interspecific host discrimination in Telenomus busseolae Gahan and T-isis Polaszek (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae), sympatric egg parasitoids of the African cereal stem borer Sesamia calamistis Hampson (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Journal of Insect Behaviour 15, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ardeh, M.J., de Jong, P.W. & van Lenteren, J.C. (2005) Intra and interspecific host discrimination in arrhenotokous and thelytokous Eretmocerus spp. Biological Control 33, 74–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, B. (1991) Conspecific superparasitism in two parasitoids wasps, Aphidius ervi Haliday and Aphelinus asychis Walker: reproductive strategies influence host discrimination. The Canadian Entomologist 123, 1229–1237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, K., van Alphen, J.J.M., van Batenburg, F.H.D., van der Hoeven, N., van Strien-van Liempt, W.T.F.H. & Turlings, T.C. (1985) The function of host discrimination and superparasitism in parasitoids. Oecologia 67, 572–576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolter, C. & Laing, J.E. (1983) Competition between Diadegma insulare (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) and Microplitis plutellae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) for larvae of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Ontario 114, 1–10.Google Scholar
Chow, A. & Mackauer, M. (1986) Host discrimination and larval competition in the aphid parasite Ephedrus californicus. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 41, 243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connel, J.H. (1980) Diversity and the coevolution of competitors, or the ghost of competition past. Oïkos 35, 131–138.Google Scholar
Godfray, H.J.C. (1994) Parasitoids, Behavioural and Evolutionary Ecology. 473 pp. Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, B.A. (2000) Species coexistence in parasitoid communities: does competition matter? pp. 198–213in Hochberg, M.E. & Ives, A.R. (Eds) Parasitoid Population Biology. Princeton, NJ, USA, Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmeister, T.S. & Roitberg, B.D. (1997) To mark the host or the patch: decisions of a parasitoid searching for concealed host larvae. Evololutionary Ecology 11, 145–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, S.F., Marris, G., Reynolds, A. & Rowe, G.W. (1987) Adaptive patterns in the avoidance of superparasitism by solitary parasitic wasps. Journal of Animal Ecology 56, 387–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kambhampati, S., Volkl, W. & Mackauer, M. (2000) Phylogenetic relationships among genera of Aphidiinae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) based on DNA sequence of the mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene. Systematic Entomology 25, 437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaneko, S. (2004) Within-plant vertical distributions of the scale insect Nipponaclerda biwakoensis and its five parasitoids that exhibit frequent successful multiparasitism on the common reed. Entomological Science 7, 331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Lann, C., Outreman, Y., van Alphen, J.J.M., Krespi, L., Pierre, J.S. & van Baaren, J. (2008) Do past experience and competitive ability influence foraging strategies of parasitoids under interspecific competition. Ecological Entomology, in press (doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2311.2008.01017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, K.Y. & Zeger, S.L. (1986) Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 73, 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackauer, M. (1990) Host discrimination and larval competition in solitary endoparasitoids. pp. 41–62in Mackauer, M., Ehler, L.E. & Roland, J. (Eds) Critical Issues in Biological Control. Andover, UK, Intercept.Google Scholar
McBrien, H. & Mackauer, M. (1990) Heterospecific larval competition and host discrimination in two species of aphid parasitoids: Aphidius ervi and Aphidius smithi. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 56, 145–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McBrien, H. & Mackauer, M. (1991) Decision to superparasitize based on larval survival: competition between aphid parasitoids Aphidius ervi and Aphidius smithi. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 59, 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, M.E. & Nault, L.R. (1977) Comparative response of aphids to the alarm pheromone, (E)-β-Farnesene. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 22, 236–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Outreman, Y. & Pierre, J.S. (2005) Adaptive value of host discrimination in parasitoids: When host defences are very costly. Behavioural Processes 70, 93–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Outreman, Y., Le Ralec, A., Plantegenest, M., Chaubet, B. & Pierre, J.S. (2001a) Superparasitism limitation in an aphid parasitoid: cornicle secretion avoidance and host discrimination ability. Journal of Insect Physiology 47, 339–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Outreman, Y., Le Ralec, A., Wajnberg, E. & Pierre, J.S. (2001b) Can imperfect host discrimination explain partial patch exploitation in parasitoids? Ecological Entomology 26, 271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Outreman, Y., Le Ralec, A., Wajnberg, E. & Pierre, J.S. (2005) Effects of within- and among-patch experiences on the patch-leaving decision rules in an insect parasitoid. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology 58, 208–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pexton, J.J. & Mayhew, P.J. (2005) Clutch size adjustment, information use and the evolution of gregarious development in parasitoid wasps. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 58, 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roitberg, B.D. & Mangel, M. (1988) On the evolutionary ecology of marking pheromones. Evolutionary Ecology 2, 289–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholz, D. & Höller, C. (1992) Competition for hosts between two hyperparasitoids of aphids, Dendrocerus laticeps and Dendrocerus carpenteri (Hymenoptera: Megaspilidae): the benefit of interspecific host discrimination. Journal of Insect Behaviour 5, 289–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirota, Y., Carter, N., Rabbinge, R. & Ankersmit, G.W. (1983) Biology of Aphidius rhopalosiphi, a parasitoid of cereal aphids. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 34, 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starý, P. (1970) Biology of Aphid Parasites (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) with Respect to Integrated Control. 643 pp. The Hague, The Netherlands, Göttingen.Google Scholar
Sugimoto, T., Uenishi, M. & Machida, F. (1986) Foraging for patchily-distributed leaf-miners by the parasitoid, Dapsilarthra rufiventris (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). I. Discrimination of previously searched leaflets. Applied Entomology and Zoology 21, 500–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turlings, T.C.J., van Batenburg, F.H.D. & van Strien-van Liempt, W.T.F.H. (1985) Why is there no interspecific host discrimination in the two coexisting larval parasitoids of Drosophila species, Leptopilina heterotoma Thompson and Asobara tabida Nees. Oecologia 67, 352–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Alphen, J.J.M. & Visser, M.E. (1990) Superparasitism as an adaptive strategy for insects parasitoids. Annual Review of Entomology 35, 59–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Baaren, J. & Boivin, G. (1998) Genotypic and kin discrimination in a solitary Hymenopterous parasitoid: implications on speciation. Evolutionary Ecology 12, 523–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Baaren, J., Boivin, G. & Nénon, J.P. (1994) Intra- and interspecific host-discrimination in two closely related egg parasitoids. Oecologia 100, 325–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Baaren, J., Boivin, G. & Nénon, J.P. (1995) Intraspecific hyperparasitism in a primery Hymenopteran parasitoid. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 36, 237–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Baaren, J., Héterier, V., Hance, T., Krespi, L., Cortesero, A.M., Poinsot, D., Le Ralec, A. & Outreman, Y. (2004) Playing the hare or the tortoise in parasitoids: could different oviposition strategies have an influence in host partitioning in two Aphidius species? Ethology Ecology Evolution 16, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Lenteren, J.C. (1981) Host discrimination by parasitoids. pp. 153–179in Nordlung, N.A., Jones, R.L. & Lewis, W.J. (Eds) Semiochemicals: Their Role in Pest Control. New York, NY, John Wiley.Google Scholar
van Strien-van Liempt, W. & van Alphen, J.J.M. (1981) The absence of interspecific host discrimination in Asobara tabida Nees (Hym.: Broconidae) and Leptopilina heterotoma (Hym.: Eucoilidae), coexisting larval parasites of Drosophila species. Netherlands Journal of Zoology 31, 701–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vet, L.E.M., Meyer, M., Bakker, K. & van Alphen, J.J.M. (1984) Intra- and interspecific host discrimination in Asobara tabida Nees (Hymenoptera) larval endoparasitoids of Drosophilidae: comparison between closely related and less closely related species. Animal Behaviour 32, 871–874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, M.E., van Alphen, J.J.M. & Nell, H.W. (1992) Adaptive superparasitism and patch time allocation in solitary parasitoids: the influence of pre-patch experience. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology 31, 163–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X.G. & Messing, R.H. (2004) Potential interactions between pupal and egg- or larval-pupal parasitoids of tephritid fruit flies. Environmental Entomology 33, 1313–1320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar