Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T05:46:27.016Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MORPHOLOGY AND HISTOLOGY OF THE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM OF THE MALE SPRUCE BUDWORM, CHORISTONEURA FUMIFERANA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

I. Outram
I. Outram
Affiliation:
Forest Research Laboratory, Department of Fisheries and Forestry, Fredericton, New Brunswick
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The morphology and histology of the internal reproductive system of the male spruce budworm moth, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens), is described and discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 102 , Issue 4 , April 1970 , pp. 404 - 414
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1970

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

Callahan, P. S. 1958. Serial morphology as a technique for determination of reproductive patterns in the corn earworm, Heliothis zea (Boddie). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 51: 413–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callahan, P. S. 1960. A morphological study of spermatophore placement and mating in the subfamily Plusiinae (Noctuidae, Lepidoptera). Proc. XI int. Congr. Ent. (Vienna) (1961), Vol 1, pp. 339–345.Google Scholar
Callahan, P. S., and Cascio, T.. 1963. Histology of the reproductive tracts and transmission of sperm in the corn earworm, Heliothis sea. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 56: 535–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callahan, P. S., and Chapin, J. B.. 1960. Morphology of the reproductive systems and mating in two representative members of the family Noctuidae, Pseudaletia unipuncta and Peridroma margaritosa, wirh comparisons to Heliothis zea. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 53: 763–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, F. L. 1929. The detection and estimation of insect chitin; and the irrelation of “chitinization” to hardness and pigmentation of the cuticula of the American cockroach, Periplaneta americana L. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 22: 401–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, F. M. 1968. Morphology of the reproductive systems of the southwestern corn borer, Diatraea grandiosella. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 61: 1143–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, T. N. 1947. The external anatomy of the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.) (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 79: 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalifa, A. 1950. Spermatophore production in Galleria mellonella L. (Lepidoptera). Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (A) 25: 33–42.Google Scholar
Musgrave, A. J. 1937. Histology of the male and female reproductive organs of Ephestia kühniella. Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. (B) 107: 337–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, M. J. 1932. Contributions towards the study of insect fertility. I. The structure and operation of the reproductive organs of the genera Ephestia and Plodia (Lepidoptera, Phycitidae). Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. (Part 3): 595–611.Google Scholar
Shen, S. K., and Berryman, A. A.. 1967. The male reproductive system and spermatogenesis of the European pine shoot moth, Rhyacionia buoliana (Lepidoptera: Olethreutidae), with observations on the effects of gamma irradiation. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60: 767–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stehr, G. 1954. A laboratory method for rearing the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Ent. 86: 423–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, V. M., and Smith, R. F.. 1960. Factors affecting egg production and oviposition in populations of Colias philodice eurytheme Boisduval (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Hilgardia 29: 411–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedders, W. L. Jr., and Calcote, V. R.. 1967. Male and female reproductive systems of Laspeyresia caryana, the hickory shuckworm moth (Lepidoptera: Olethreutidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 60: 280–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. L. 1940. The anatomy of the internal genitalia and the mating behaviour of some lasiocampid moths. J. Morphol. 67: 411–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar