Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-09T18:57:40.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A new substitute host and its effects on some biological properties of Ooencyrtus kuvanae

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 March 2017

Hilal Tunca*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Ankara University, 06110, Ankara Dıskapı, Turkey
Marine Venard
Affiliation:
INRA, UEFM site Villa Thuret, Laboratoire BioContrôle, 90 Chemin Raymond, 06160, Antibes, France
Etty-Ambre Colombel
Affiliation:
INRA, UEFM site Villa Thuret, Laboratoire BioContrôle, 90 Chemin Raymond, 06160, Antibes, France
Elisabeth Tabone
Affiliation:
INRA, UEFM site Villa Thuret, Laboratoire BioContrôle, 90 Chemin Raymond, 06160, Antibes, France
*
*Author for correspondence Phone: +90 312 5961384 Fax: +90 312 3187029 E-mail: htunca@ankara.edu.tr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Lymantia dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), commonly known as the gypsy moth, is a serious forest pest, and beneficial insects are particularly important for reducing its population numbers. Ooencyrtus kuvanae (Howard) (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) is an arrhenotokous, solitary egg parasitoid of L. dispar. In this study, we evaluated a new substitute host, Philosamia ricini (Danovan) (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae) for O. kuvanae. We investigated some of the biological effects of O. kuvanae on P. ricini eggs. In this context, the importance of the age of the female parasitoid (1, 3 or 5 days old), host age (1–2 and 3–4 days old) and host number (40, 60 and 80 host eggs) were examined under laboratory conditions (25 ± 1 °C, 65 ± 5% relative humidity and a 16 : 8 h photoperiod [light : dark]). The highest rate of offspring production (89.90%) occurred with 40 (1–2-day-old) host eggs and 5-day-old females. The mean developmental period ranged from 16.5 ± 0.08 days to 18.7 ± 0.08 days. The mean lifespan of the parasitoid was 51.10 ± 1.1 (n = 60) days with bio-honey and 3.92 ± 0.14 (n = 60) days without food. The mean fecundity was 68.88 ± 3.22 offspring/female. Peak adult emergence occurred between 2 and 9 days. The mean oviposition and mean post-oviposition periods of the female parasitoid were 22.76 ± 1.37 days and 13.64 ± 1.40 days, respectively. O. kuvanae was reared for more than ten generations on the eggs of P. ricini. Based on our findings, P. ricini can be used to rear O. kuvanae for the biological control of L. dispar.

Type
Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Introduction

A forest ecosystem is a complex unit of biodiversity, and its components include plants, animals, insects, microorganisms and their interactive relationships (Hunter, Reference Hunter1999). Due to their toxic effects on many beneficial organisms, chemical pesticides should not be used for insect pest control in sustainable forest ecosystems. Furthermore, the overuse of pesticides for pest control may result in the development of potential resistance to insecticides by the pest insects being targeted (Sánchez-Bayo et al., Reference Sánchez-Bayo, van den Brink and Mann2011). Thus, green pest-control methods such as microbial control and traps and beneficial insects should be used to replace pesticides.

Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), the gypsy moth, is a defoliator of mainly forest trees (Gould et al., Reference Gould, Elkinton and Wallner1990). It is of Eurasian origin and has a range that covers Europe, Africa, and North America (Keena et al., Reference Keena, Coté, Grinberg and Wallner2008). Gypsy moth larvae are known to feed on over 500 plant species within 73 families (Lance, Reference Lance and Ahmad1983; Liebhold et al., Reference Liebhold, Gottschalk, Muzika, Montgomery, Young, O'day and Kelly1995; Mrdaković et al., Reference Mrdaković, Mataruga, Ilijin, Vlahović, Tomanić, Mirčić and Lazarević2013). The larvae can cause economic damage and reduce forage production. The greatest impact of gypsy moths is the physiological stress in trees caused by defoliation (Humble & Stewart, Reference Humble and Stewart1994; Papadopoulou et al., Reference Papadopoulou, Chryssochoides and Katanos2009).

Biological control is an alternative approach to reducing populations of L. dispar, using natural enemies. Bacillus thuringiensis-based insecticides are in widespread use because of their specific toxicity against certain pests in the larval stage (Höfte & Whiteley, Reference Höfte and Whiteley1989). The microbial insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki is often used to manage L. dispar (McCullough et al., Reference McCullough, Raffa and Williamson1999; Fabel, Reference Fabel2000). However, parasitoids play an important role in the biological control of L. dispar, and several European hymenopteran parasitoids of the gypsy moth have been established (e.g., Ooencyrtus kuvanae [Howard] [Encyrtidae] Anastatus japonicus Ashmead [=disparis Rushka] [Eupelmidae], Cotesia melanoscelus Ratzeburg [Braconidae], Phobocampe disparis [Viereck] [Ichneumonidae], Monodontomerus aereus Walker [Torymidae], Brachymeria intermedia [Nees]).

O. kuvanae (Howard) is a small encyrtid egg parasitoid that serves as a potential biological control agent of L. dispar. O. kuvanae was originally known to exist only in Japan, but now it is found to have nearly a Holarctic distribution. This parasitoid is an arrhenotokous and multivoltine species (Tadic & Bincev, Reference Tadic and Bincev1959; Brown, Reference Brown1984). The egg stage of L. dispar has a very long period, which can be used by O. kuvanae to go through several generations, each contributing to augmented parasitism rates in the field (Hofstetter & Raffa, Reference Hofstetter and Raffa1998; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Liu, Zhang, Wen and Wei2013). In addition, O. kuvanae can adapt to several different environmental conditions and is an abundant species (Brown, Reference Brown1984). However, it is not possible to rear this parasitoid on its natural host under laboratory conditions, because its natural host, L. dispar, is an univoltine species; additionally, the egg masses and urticacious hairs on the larvae of this host may cause allergic reactions in humans (Fabel, Reference Fabel2000; McCullough & Bauer Reference McCullough and Bauer2000; Tong et al., Reference Tong, Chun-xiang and Guo-cai2000). There are three main methods of rearing parasitoids, namely, on a natural host, on a substitute host and on an artificial diet (Consoli et al., Reference Consoli, Parra and Zucchi2000). Natural enemy rearing on substitute hosts is a determining factor for the success of many biocontrol programs, because this rearing option reduces production costs and increases the viability of large-scale use of the beneficial insect (Parra, Reference Parra, Parra and Zucchi1997).

In this study, Phylosamia ricini Donovan (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae) was selected as a new substitute host. P. ricini eggs have been used for the laboratory rearing of a number of parasitoids such as Trichogramma chilonis Ishii, Trichogramma dendrolimi Matsumura (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) and Anastatus japonicus (Hymenoptera: Eupelmidae) (Pu et al., Reference Pu, Liu and Zhang1988; Liu et al., Reference Liu, Zhang and Zhang1998). The host plants of P. ricini, Ligustrum vulgare (Lamiales: Oleaceae) and Ailanthus spp., facilitate the rearing of this lepidopterous species in the laboratory (Saito, Reference Saito1998; Osanai et al., Reference Osanai, Okudaira, Naito, Demura and Asakura2000; Tiradon et al., Reference Tiradon, Bonnet, Do Thi, Colombel, Buradino and Tabone2013). Females lay many eggs during their short lifespan (approximately 250 eggs per female); they are not subject to diapause and their eggs are large (1656.5 × 1143 µm2) (Tunca et al., Reference Tunca, Colombel, Sousan, Buradino, Galio and Tabone2015).

Host quality is a significant cause for the success of parasitism by parasitoid biocontrol agents. Host size (particularly for solitary parasitoids), host plant, host species and host age can affect host quality (Vinson & Iwantsch, Reference Vinson and Iwantsch1980; King, Reference King1987; Godfray, Reference Godfray1994; Campan & Benrey, Reference Campan and Benrey2004; Shuker & West, Reference Shuker and West2004; Ueno, Reference Ueno2005). Host age is an important factor influencing host acceptance and host suitability for the parasitoid egg (Vinson & Iwantsch, Reference Vinson and Iwantsch1980; Zhou et al., Reference Zhou, Abram, Boivin and Brodeur2014). Furthermore, the age of the female parasitoid is a determinant of reproductive rate and can affect parasitism (Amalin et al., Reference Amalin, Peña and Duncan2005; Aung et al., Reference Aung, Takagi and Ueno2010; Pizzol et al., Reference Pizzol, Desneux, Wajnberg and Thiéry2012). In this study, the age of the host and the age of the female parasitoid were investigated, with the aim of evaluating the new substitute host, P. ricini. We investigated the biological characteristics (offspring production ratio, development time, longevity, and fecundity) of O. kuvanae reared on eggs of this host. The establishment of new laboratory rearing methods of O. kuvanae on P. ricini will contribute to the laboratory rearing of this parasitoid.

Materials and methods

This study was performed at the INRA-PACA Mediterranean Forest and Entomology Unit, Laboratory of Biological Control, Antibes, France.

Rearing the host P. ricini

P. ricini eggs were collected daily in a Petri dish (5 cm) and kept inside an incubator at 25 ± 1 °C, 65 ± 5% relative humidity (RH), and a photoperiod of 16 : 8 h (light : dark [L : D]). Newly hatched larvae were transferred to plastic boxes (26 × 12 × 7 cm3) and were fed every day with fresh privet leaves, L. vulgare (Lamiales: Oleaceae). Different larval stages were reared in separate boxes and observed until pupation. Just after the pupal stage, individual pupae were shifted to adult rearing cages (30 × 39 × 30 cm3). This process was repeated on a daily basis.

Rearing the parasitoid O. kuvanae

The O. kuvanae colony was obtained from the parasitized eggs of L. dispar collected from the fields in Arbois-Avignon. Adult parasitoids were reared in glass tubes (1 × 7 cm2) and maintained in an incubator at 25 ± 1 °C, 65 ± 5% RH, and a photoperiod of 16 : 8 h (L : D). A drop of bio-honey was offered at 2-day intervals as a food source for adult parasitoids. The egg masses of P. ricini were collected and exposed daily to the mated female parasitoid. Then the offspring were allowed to emerge. Female and male parasitoids were collected at emergence. After mating, 90 females were kept to reach the different ages needed for the experiments. The remaining adult parasitoids were used to establish parasitoid cultures under laboratory conditions.

Experimental techniques

We tested the effects of age and number of P. ricini eggs and age of O. kuvanae females on offspring production ratio and development time. For this purpose, we used a 2 × 3 × 3 factorial design. There were two levels of treatment according to the age of P. ricini (1–2 days old and 3–4 days old), three levels of treatment for the number of P. ricini (40, 60, and 80 eggs), and three levels of treatment for the age of O. kuvanae (1, 3 and 5 days old). Furthermore, 40, 60 or 80 unparasitized eggs of P. ricini (either 1–2 or 3–4 days old) were exposed in a test tube (1 × 7 cm2) to single mated O. kuvanae females (1, 3 or 5 days old), with a drop of honey, for parasitism. The bottoms of each test tube were covered with cotton. A total of 180 host eggs per treatment and a total of 1080 host eggs per replication were used. The experiments were performed in five replicates. The emergence of adult parasitoids (at regular intervals of 24 h) and the dates of emergence of O. kuvanae adults were recorded to determine the offspring production ratio and development time. In addition, the longevity of the adult parasitoids was investigated under dietary (bio-honey) and non-dietary conditions. Longevity was measured from adult emergence until death. The experiment was performed in triplicate. A single mated O. kuvanae female (1-day old) reared from the eggs of P. ricini was introduced into a test tube (1 × 7 cm2) with 15 P. ricini eggs. Bio-honey was supplied as a nutrient for the female parasitoid. The P. ricini eggs were replaced daily with new batches of 15 eggs until the female died. The previous eggs were transferred to an incubator (25 ± 1 °C, 65 ± 5% RH and a photoperiod of 16 : 8 h [L : D]). Seventeen female parasitoids were tested, and we measured the realized fecundity and the means of the oviposition period and the post-oviposition period.

Data analysis

The offspring production ratio and development time were analyzed using a general linear model with the age of the hosts, number of hosts and the age of the female parasitoid as factors. Percentage data were normalized using an arcsine transformation (p′ = arcsine √p; Zar, Reference Zar1999). Longevity was analyzed using a two-sample t test (Minitab Release 14; SAS Institute, 2003; McKenzie & Goldman, Reference McKenzie and Goldman2005). The corresponding means (±standard error) for the oviposition and post-oviposition periods were calculated for the realized fecundity.

Results

There was a significant impact (P < 0.001) of both parasitoid age and host number on the offspring production ratio (table 1). The highest and the lowest offspring production percentages were obtained from a 5-day-old female with 40 host eggs (89.90%) and a 1-day-old female with 80 host eggs (27.60%) (table 2). Three factors (parasitoid age × host number × host age) showed a significant interaction (P < 0.001) on the development time of O. kuvanae (table 3). The minimum and maximum mean development times were 16.5 ± 0.08 days and 18.7 ± 0.08 days, respectively (table 4). Although these development times do not seem to differ much, a significantly shorter development time was observed in young (1–2-day-old) host eggs. The mean lifespan of adults was 51.10 ± 1.1 days with honey and 3.92 ± 0.14 days without honey (t60 = −42.05, P < 0.000). The mean number of offspring developed from the eggs laid by a single female reared on P. ricini (realized fecundity of female O. kuvanae) was 68.88 ± 3.22. Furthermore, the means of the oviposition and post-oviposition periods were 22.76 ± 1.37 days and 13.64 ± 1.40 days, respectively. Peak adult emergence occurred between 2 and 9 days. The emergence of the adults continued for about 3 weeks (fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Daily offspring number (mean ± SE) of Ooencyrthus kuvanae over the lifetime.

Table 1. Results of a GLM analysis of the offspring production ratio of Ooencyrtus kuvanae.

Table 2. Effects of parasitoid age and host number on the offspring production ratio of Ooencyrtus kuvanae (mean ± standard error).

1 Means in each row followed by the same capital letter do not differ statistically.

2 Means in each column followed by the same lowercase letter do not differ statistically.

Table 3. Results of a GLM analysis of the development time of Ooencyrus kuvanae.

Table 4. Variation in development time (mean ± standard error) of Ooencyrtus kuvanae with parasitoid age, host number, and host age.

1 Means in each row followed by the same capital letter do not differ statistically.

2 Means in each column followed by the same lowercase letter do not differ statistically.

Discussion

We first determined some of the biological effects of the egg parasitoid O. kuvanae on a new substitute host, P. ricini. Substitute hosts are used to either decrease rearing costs or increase performance in rearing of parasitoids, and a careful selection of substitute hosts is important in biological control programs (Fedde et al., Reference Fedde, Fedde and Drooz1982); nevertheless, the suitability of these alternative hosts can vary greatly for a polyphagous parasitoid (Hoffmann et al., Reference Hoffmann, Ode, Walker, Gardner, van Nouhuys and Shelton2001). Initially, basic biological studies should be performed taking into account various factors (e.g., host age, host number and parasitoid age).

The percentage of offspring that emerged refers to the suitability of the host for insect parasitoid development (El Sharkawy, Reference El Sharkawy2011). In our study, the optimal offspring production rate was obtained from 40 host eggs and 5-day-old females. Our study demonstrates that the age of the host egg has no effect on the parasitoid's offspring production rate. O. kuvanae females were able to parasitize 1–2-day-old and 3–4-day-old eggs of P. ricini. The age of the host is one of the most important factors determining host acceptance by parasitoids (Vinson, Reference Vinson, Kerkut and Gilbert1985). According to Strand (Reference Strand, Waage and Greathead1986) and Vinson (Reference Vinson1998), hymenopter parasitoids can parasitize and develop on all host developmental stages, as they are able to adapt to a range of host conditions. However, the preference for young host eggs is important because the development of parasitoid offspring is influenced by the nutritional quality of the host eggs. Egg parasitoids often choose young or intermediately aged host eggs for parasitism (Reznik & Umarova, Reference Reznik and Umarova1990; Monje et al., Reference Monje, Zebitz and Ohnesorge1999).

Researchers have also found that old host eggs (≥4 days) are less suitable for some Ooencyrtus species, although Ooencyrtus females are able to adapt to any host egg (Nechols et al., Reference Nechols, Tracy and Vogt1989; Takasu & Hirose Reference Takasu and Hirose1993; Hofstetter & Raffa Reference Hofstetter and Raffa1998). Our results are in agreement with those of Zhao et al. (Reference Zhao, Zeng, Xu, Lu and Liang2013), who found that all ages (2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 days old) of Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) (Diptera: Tephritidae) pupae can be successfully parasitized by the parasitoid Pachycrepoideus vindemmiae (Rondani) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Zhou et al. (Reference Zhou, Abram, Boivin and Brodeur2014) reported that Telenomus podisi Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) can successfully develop in all ages of Podisus maculiventris (Say) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) eggs. Pak et al. (Reference Pak, Buis, Heck and Hermans1986) and Jacob et al. (Reference Jacob, Joder and Batchelor2006) showed that old host eggs do not have any negative effect on parasitoid preference or offspring fitness. On the other hand, King (Reference King1998) demonstrated that the number of offspring decreases with increasing host age (1-, 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-day-old housefly pupae) for the pupal parasitoid Spalangia cameroni (Wiki) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Da Rocha et al. (Reference Da Rocha, Kolberg, Mendonça and Redaelli2006) observed that offspring emergence of the egg parasitoid Gryon gallardoi (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) decreases with increasing host age. Furthermore, different ages (1, 2 or 3 days old) of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) eggs affect the percentage emergence of Telenomus remus Nixon (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) (Peñaflor et al., Reference Peñaflor, De Moraes Sarmento, Da Silva, Werneburg and Bento2012). We conclude that the effects of host age vary according to parasitoid species.

In our study, we observed minimal decreases in development time with increases in the age of P. ricini eggs. Several studies have found that development time varies with host age in many parasitoids, such as Nasonia vitripennis (Walker) (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) (Wylie, Reference Wylie1964), Dinarmus basalis (Rond.) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) (Islam, Reference Islam1994), Brachymeria lasus (Walker) (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) (Husni et al., Reference Husni, Yooichi and Hiroshi2001) and Diadromus collaris (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) (Wang & Liu, Reference Wang and Liu2002). Peverieri et al. (Reference Peverieri, Furlan, Benassai, Caradonna, Strong and Roversi2013) reported that the development time of the egg parasitoid Gryon pennsylvanicum (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) is longer in older eggs of Leptoglossus occidentalis Heidemann (Heteroptera, Coreidae), and Da Rocha et al. (Reference Da Rocha, Kolberg, Mendonça and Redaelli2006) had the same result for Gryon gallardoi (Brethes) (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Crossman (Reference Crossman1925) and Kamay (Reference Kamay1976) reported that the development time of O. kuvanae was 21 days at 25 °C and 14 days at 30 °C.

In our study, an optimal offspring production rate was obtained using 5-day-old female O. kuvanae. The reproductive strategies of parasitoids range from synovigenic to proovigenic. Characteristics of the female such as age may also affect offspring production, particularly in synovigenic parasitoids. If a female parasitoid is synovigenic, such as O. kuvanae, she is born with immature eggs (this contrasts with the proovigenic strategy, where adult females have a fixed number of oocytes within their ovarioles) and needs to feed as an adult to sustain egg production. Therefore, increased egg production draws on the energy reserves that could be allocated to extending longevity (Francisco, Reference Francisco2001; Mondy et al., Reference Mondy, Corio-Costet, Bodin, Mandon, Vannier and Monge2006; Jervis et al., Reference Jervis, Ellers and Harvey2008). Heimpel et al. (Reference Heimpel, Rosenheim and Kattari1997) reported that synovigenic Aphytis females emerge with a fraction of the eggs that can potentially mature during a lifetime. Ueno & Ueno (Reference Ueno and Ueno2007) showed that the rate of oviposition strongly depends on female age; immature eggs are low in number in the earliest stage of the synovigenic female Itoplectis naranyae Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) and subsequently increase with increasing female age.

Adult nutrition can have important effects on the lifetime reproductive success of female parasitoids (Hagen, Reference Hagen, Boethel and Eikenhary1986; Jervis et al., Reference Jervis, Kidd and Heimpel1996). Synovigenic parasitoid species can utilize both host hemolymph and non-host foods such as nectar, honeydew and pollen in natural conditions (Jervis et al., Reference Jervis, Kidd, Fitton, Huddleston and Dawah1993, Reference Jervis, Kidd and Heimpel1996; Heimpel & Collier, Reference Heimpel and Collier1996; Jervis & Kidd, Reference Jervis and Kidd1996, Reference Jervis, Kidd, Hawkins and Cornell1999; Gilbert & Jervis, Reference Gilbert and Jervis1998). Under laboratory conditions, different adult diets such as different sugars or honey increase longevity and egg maturation (Jervis & Kidd, Reference Jervis and Kidd1986; Heimpel & Collier, Reference Heimpel and Collier1996). Carbohydrate sources affect the longevity of adult parasitoids (Jacob & Evans, Reference Jacob and Evans1998). A significantly increased mean lifespan for O. kuvanae (51 days) may be achieved in the presence of honey, and in the absence of honey, parasitoids died within 3.91 days. Different sugars (solutions of glucose, fructose and sucrose), undiluted bee honey and distilled water have been assessed for adult Trichogrammatoidea bactrae Nagaraja (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) longevity. The longevity of females fed honey is significantly increased (Perera & Hemachandra, Reference Perera and Hemachandra2014). Tunca et al. (Reference Tunca, Gökçek and Özkan2002) evaluated glucose, fructose, sucrose and honey diets for Chelonus oculator Panzer (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and determined that honey is a better diet for parasitoids than other sugars. Similar observations have been made for Catolaccus grandis (Burks) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) (Ramos & Cate, Reference Ramos and Cate1992) and Venturia canescens (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) (Eliopoulos et al., Reference Eliopoulos, Stathas and Bouras2005). Crossman (Reference Crossman1925) noted a 28–42-day longevity for O. kuvanae females, and the same researcher recorded a longevity of up to 130 days for females and 105 days for males under laboratory conditions. On the other hand, Hérard & Mercadier (Reference Hérard and Mercadier1980) reported the greatest longevity of female and male parasitoids as 57 and 37 days.

In the current study, a mean of 68.88 ± 3.22 adults developed from the eggs laid by a female reared from P. ricini. This value was 68.1 ± 5.0 on Antheraea pernyi Guerin-Meneville (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae) and 32.8 ± 2.8 on L. dispar in a previous study (Wang et al., Reference Wang, Liu, Zhang, Wen and Wei2013). The mean oviposition and mean post-oviposition periods of the female O. kuvanae reared on P. ricini were 22.76 ± 1.37 days and 13.64 ± 1.40 days, respectively. According to Wang et al. (Reference Wang, Liu, Zhang, Wen and Wei2013), the mean oviposition period is 25 ± 1.7 days and 21.9 ± 1.9 days for A. pernyi-reared O. kuvanae females and L. dispar-reared O. kuvanae females. Several factors may influence offspring production in O. kuvanae females. However, more offspring are produced using P. ricini, which is an important finding for L. dispar biological control programs. Usually, it is more advantageous to use substitute hosts for parasitoids; however, Yang et al. (Reference Yang, Achterberg, Choi and Marsh2005) argued that parasitoids are more effective when reared on their original host than on a substitute host. Our results indicate that P. ricini is ideal for rearing O. kuvanae.

Acknowledgements

Great appreciation is extended to Jean Claude Martin (INRA-Unité Expérimentale Forestière Méditerranéenne) for his critical review of the manuscript.

References

Amalin, D.M., Peña, J.E. & Duncan, R.E. (2005) Effects of host age, female parasitoid age, and host plant on parasitism of Ceratogramma etiennei (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Florida Entomologist 88 (1), 7782.Google Scholar
Aung, K.S.D., Takagi, M. & Ueno, T. (2010) Effect of female's age on the progeny production and sex ratio of Ooencyrtus nezarae, an egg parasitoid of the bean bug Riptortus clavatus. Journal of Faculty Agriculture, Kyushu University 55 (1), 8385.Google Scholar
Brown, M.W. (1984) Literature review of Ooencyrtus kuvanae (Hym.: Encyrtidae), an egg parasite of Lymantria dispar (Lep.: Lymantriidae). Entomophaga 29 (3), 249265.Google Scholar
Campan, E. & Benrey, B. (2004) Behavior and performance of a specialist and a generalist parasitoid of bruchids on wild and cultivated beans. Biological Control 30, 220228.Google Scholar
Consoli, F.L., Parra, J.R.P. & Zucchi, R.A. (2000) Egg Parasitoids in Agroecosystems with Emphasis on Trichogramma. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York, Springer. 473 pp.Google Scholar
Crossman, S.S. (1925) Two imported egg parasites of the gypsy moth, Anastatus bifasciatus Fonsc. and Schedius kuvanae Howard. Journal of Agricultural Research 30, 643675.Google Scholar
Da Rocha, L., Kolberg, R., Mendonça, J.R.M.S. & Redaelli, L.R. (2006) Effects of egg age of Spartocera dentiventris (berg) (Hemiptera: Coreidae) on parasitism by Gryon gallardoi (Brethes) (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Neotropical Entomology 35, 654659.Google Scholar
Eliopoulos, P., Stathas, J.G. & Bouras, S.L. (2005) Effects and interactions of temperature, host deprivation and adult feeding on the longevity of the parasitoid Venturia canescens (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). European Journal of Entomology 102 (2): 181187.Google Scholar
El Sharkawy, M.A.A. (2011) Effect of egg age and fertility on some biological aspects of three Trichogramma species. Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research 89 (4), 13131326.Google Scholar
Fabel, S. (2000) Effects of Lymantria dispar, the Gypsy moth, on broadleaved forests in eastern North America. Restoration and Reclamation Review 6 (6), 115.Google Scholar
Fedde, V.H., Fedde, G.F. & Drooz, A.T. (1982) Factitious hosts in insect parasitoid rearings. Entomophaga 27(4), 379386.Google Scholar
Francisco, J.A. (2001) The effects of egg production on longevity in the parasitoid Mastrus ridibundus. nature.berkeley.edu/classes/es196/projects/.../Francisco.pdf.Google Scholar
Gilbert, F.S. & Jervis, M.A. (1998) Functional, evolutionary and ecological aspects of feeding-related mouthpart specializations in parasitoid flies. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 63, 495535.Google Scholar
Godfray, H.C.J. (1994) Parasitoids: Behavioral and Evolutionary Ecology. Princeton, NJ, USA, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gould, J.R., Elkinton, J.S. & Wallner, W.E. (1990) Density-dependent suppression of experimentally created gypsy moth Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) populations by natural enemies. Journal of Animal Ecology 59, 213233.Google Scholar
Hagen, K.S. (1986) Ecosystem analysis: plant cultivars (HPR), entomophagous species and food supplements. pp. 151197 in Boethel, D.J. & Eikenhary, R.D. (Eds) Interactions of Plant Resistance and Parasitoids and Predators of Insects. Chichester/New York, Ellis Horwood/John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Heimpel, G.E. & Collier, T.R. (1996) The evolution of host-feeding behaviour in insect parasitoids. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 71, 373400.Google Scholar
Heimpel, G.E., Rosenheim, J.A. & Kattari, D. (1997) Adult feeding and lifetime reproductive success in the parasitoid Aphytis melinus. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 83, 305315.Google Scholar
Hérard, F. & Mercadier, G. (1980) Bionomies compares de deux souches (Maroccaine et Américaine) d’ Ooencytus kuvanae (Hym.: Encyrtidae), parasite oophage de Lymantria dispar (Lep.: Lymantriidae). Entomophaga, 25, 129138.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, M.P., Ode, P.R., Walker, D.L., Gardner, J., van Nouhuys, S. & Shelton, A.M. (2001) Performance of Trichogramma ostriniae (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) reared on factitious hosts, including the target host, Ostrinia nubilalis (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Biological Control 21, 110.Google Scholar
Hofstetter, R.W. & Raffa, K.F. (1998) Endogenous and exogenous factors affecting the orientation and development of the gypsy moth egg parasite, Ooencyrtus kuvanae. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 88, 123135.Google Scholar
Höfte, H. & Whiteley, H.R. (1989) Insecticidal crystal proteins of Bacillus thuringiensis. Microbiol Review 53, 242255.Google Scholar
Humble, L. & Stewart, A.J. (1994) Forest Pest Leaflet: Gypsy Moth Canadian Forest Service. Burnaby, BC, Natural Resources Canada. http://www.pfc.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi-bin/bstore/catalog_e.pl?catalog=3456, Electronic version accessed on 20060619.Google Scholar
Hunter, M. L. (1999) Maintaining Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, ISBN: 0-521-63104-1.Google Scholar
Husni, , Yooichi, K. & Hiroshi, H. (2001) Effects of host pupal age on host preference and host suitability in Brachymeria lasus (Walker) (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae). Applied Entomology and Zoology 36 (1), 97102.Google Scholar
Islam, W. (1994) Effect of host age on rate of development of Dinarmus basalis (Rond.) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Journal of Applied Entomology 118, 392398.Google Scholar
Jacob, H.S. & Evans, E.W. (1998) Effects of sugar spray and aphid honeydew on field populations of the parasitoid Bathyplectes curculionis (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). Environmental Entomology 27, 15631568.Google Scholar
Jacob, H.S., Joder, A. & Batchelor, K.L. (2006) Biology of Stethynium sp. (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae), a native parasitoid of an introduced weed biological control agent. Environmental Entomology 35, 630636.Google Scholar
Jervis, M.A. & Kidd, N.A.C. (1986) Host-feeding strategies in hymenopteran parasitoids. Biological Reviews 61, 395434.Google Scholar
Jervis, M.A. & Kidd, N.A.C. (1996) Insect Natural: Enemies, Practical Approaches to their Study and Evaluation. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
Jervis, M.A. & Kidd, N.A.C. (1999) Parasitoid adult nutritional ecology: implications for biological control. pp. 131151 in Hawkins, B.A. & Cornell, H.V. (Eds) Theoretical Practical Approaches to Biology Control. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jervis, M.A., Kidd, N.A.C, Fitton, M.G., Huddleston, T. & Dawah, H.A. (1993) Flower-visiting by hymenopteran parasitoids. Journal of Natural History 27, 67105.Google Scholar
Jervis, M.A., Kidd, N.A.C. & Heimpel, G.E. (1996) Parasitoid adult feeding behavior and biocontrol a review. Biocontrol News and Information 17, 1126.Google Scholar
Jervis, M.A., Ellers, J. & Harvey, J.A. (2008) Resource acquisition, allocation and utilization in parasitoid reproductive strategies. Annual Review of Entomology 53, 361385.Google Scholar
Kamay, B.A. (1976) The effects of various constant temperatures on oviposition, sex ratio, and rate of development of the gypsy moth egg parasite, Ooencyrtus kuwanai Howard. M.S. Thesis, Southern Connecticut state College, New Haven, Connecticut. 50 pp.Google Scholar
Keena, M.A., Coté, M.J., Grinberg, P.S. & Wallner, W. E. (2008) World distribution of female flight and genetic variation in Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Environmental Entomology 37, 636649.Google Scholar
King, B.H. (1987) Offspring sex ratios in parasitoid wasps. Quarterly Review of Biology 62, 367396.Google Scholar
King, B.H. (1998) Host age response in the parasitoid wasp Spalangia cameroni (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Journal of Insect Behavior 11 (1), 103117.Google Scholar
Lance, D.R. (1983) Host-seeking behavior of the gypsy moth: the influence of polyphagy and highly apparent host plants. pp. 210224 in Ahmad, S. (Ed.) Herbivorous Insects: Host-Seeking Behavior and Mechanisms. New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Liebhold, A.M., Gottschalk, K.W., Muzika, R.M., Montgomery, M.E., Young, R., O'day, K. & Kelly, B. (1995) Suitability of North American tree species to gypsy moth: a summary of field and laboratory tests. General Technical Report NE-211. Randor, PA, USDA Forest Service, 34 pp.Google Scholar
Liu, S., Zhang, G. & Zhang, F. (1998) Factors influencing parasitism of Trichogramma denrolimi on the eggs of the Asian corn borer, Ostrinia furnacalis. BioControl 43, 273287.Google Scholar
McCullough, D.M. & Bauer, L.S. (2000) Bt: One Option for Gypsy Moth Management. E-2421. East Lansing, MI, Michigan State University Extension, Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station.Google Scholar
McCullough, D.M., Raffa, K.A. & Williamson, R.C. (1999) Natural Enemies of Gypsy Moth: The GoodGuys!. Extension Bulletin E-2700, April, 1–4.Google Scholar
McKenzie, J.D. & Goldman, R. (2005) The Student Guide to Minitab Release 14. Boston, Pearson Education.Google Scholar
MINITAB Release 14. (2004) Statistical Software for Windows.Google Scholar
Mondy, N., Corio-Costet, M.F., Bodin, A., Mandon, N., Vannier, F. & Monge, J.P. (2006) Importance of sterols acquired through host feeding in synovigenic parasitoid oogenesis. Journal of Insect Physiology 52, 897904.Google Scholar
Monje, J.C., Zebitz, C.P.W. & Ohnesorge, B. (1999) Host and host age preference of Trichogramma galloi and T. pretiosum (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) reared on different hosts. Journal of Economic Entomology 92, 97103.Google Scholar
Mrdaković, M., Mataruga, P.V., Ilijin, L., Vlahović, M., Tomanić, J.M., Mirčić, D. & Lazarević, J. (2013) Response of Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) larvae from differently adapted populations to allelochemical stress: effects of tannic acid. European Journal of Entomology 110 (1), 5563.Google Scholar
Nechols, J.R., Tracy, J.L. & Vogt, E.A. (1989) Comparative ecological studies of indigenous egg parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae; Encyrtidae) of the squash bug, Anasa tristis (Hemiptera: Coreidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 62, 177188.Google Scholar
Osanai, M., Okudaira, M., Naito, J., Demura, M. & Asakura, T. (2000) Biosynthesis of L-alanine, a major amino acid of fibroin in Samia cynthia ricini. Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 30, 225232.Google Scholar
Pak, G.A., Buis, H.C.E.M., Heck, I.C.C. & Hermans, M.L.G. (1986) Behavioural variations among strains of Trichogramma spp.: host-age selection. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 40, 247258.Google Scholar
Papadopoulou, Sm., Chryssochoides, C. & Katanos, J. (2009). Control of Lymantria dispar L. for eliminating the risk of forage production loss for small ruminants. Nutritional and Foraging Ecology of Sheep and Goats 85, 197199.Google Scholar
Parra, J.R.P. (1997) Técnicas de criação de Anagasta kuehniella, hospedeiro alternativo para produção de Trichogramma. pp. 121150 in Parra, J.R.P. & Zucchi, R.A. (Eds) Trichogramma e o controle biológico aplicado, Piracicaba, FEALQ/USP.Google Scholar
Peñaflor, M.F.G.V., De Moraes Sarmento, M.M., Da Silva, C.S.B., Werneburg, A.G. & Bento, J.M.S. (2012) Effect of host egg age on preference, development and arrestment of Telenomus remus (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). European Journal of Entomology 109 (1), 1520.Google Scholar
Perera, M.C.D. & Hemachandra, K.S. (2014) Study of longevity, fecundity and oviposition of Trichogrammatoidea bactrae Nagaraja (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) to facilitate mass rearing. Journal of Tropical Agriculture 25, 502509.Google Scholar
Peverieri, G.S., Furlan, P., Benassai, D., Caradonna, S., Strong, W.B. & Roversi, P.F. (2013) Host egg age of Leptoglossus occidentalis (Heteroptera: Coreidae) and parasitism by Gryon pennsylvanicum (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae). Journal of Economic Entomology 106 (2), 633640.Google Scholar
Pizzol, J., Desneux, N., Wajnberg, E. & Thiéry, D. (2012) Parasitoid and host egg ages have independent impact on various biological traits in a Trichogramma species. Journal of Pest Science 85 (4), 489496.Google Scholar
Pu, T.S., Liu, Z.H. & Zhang, Y.X. (1988) Studies on Trichogramma. Colloq Inra 43, 551556.Google Scholar
Ramos, J.A.M. & Cate, J.R. (1992) Rate of increase and adult longevity of Catolaccus grandis (Burks) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) in the laboratory of four temperatures. Environmental Entomology 21, 620627.Google Scholar
Reznik, S.Ya. & Umarova, T.Ya. (1990) The influence of host's age on the selectivity of parasitism and fecundity of Trichogramma. Entomophaga 35, 3137.Google Scholar
Saito, H. (1998) Purification and characterization of two insecticyanin-type proteins from the larval hemolymph of the Eri-silkworm, Samia cynthia ricini. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1380, 141150.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Bayo, F., van den Brink, P.J. & Mann, R.M. (2011) Ecological Impacts of Toxic Chemicals. ISBN: 978-1-60805-663-7.Google Scholar
SAS Institute (2003) SAS/STAT Version 8.2. Cary, NC, SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Shuker, D.M. & West, S.A. (2004) Information constraints and the precision of adaptation: sex ratio manipulation in wasps. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 101, 1036310367. (doi:10.1073/pnas.030804101).Google Scholar
Strand, M.R. (1986) The physiological interactions of parasitoids with their hosts and their influence on reproductive strategies. pp. 97136 in Waage, J. & Greathead, D. (Eds) Insect Parasitoids. London, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Tadic, M.D. & Bincev, B. (1959) Ooencyrtus kuvanae How in Yugoslavia. Zaštita Bilja 10, 5159.Google Scholar
Takasu, K. & Hirose, Y. (1993) Host acceptance behavior by the host-feeding egg parasitoid, Ooencyrtus nezarae (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae): host age effects. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 86 (1), 117121.Google Scholar
Tiradon, M., Bonnet, A., Do Thi, K.H., Colombel, E., Buradino, M. & Tabone, E. (2013) Evaluation of a new biological pest control method against the palm borer, Paysandisia archon using oophagous parasitoids, in Proceedings AFPP of the ‘conférence méditerranéenne sur les ravageurs des palmiers.Google Scholar
Tong, L., Chun-xiang, H. & Guo-cai, Z. (2000) Life circle and bionomics of Lymantria dispar. Journal of Forestry Research 11 (4), 255258.Google Scholar
Tunca, H., Gökçek, N. & Özkan, C. (2002) Farklı besin çeşitlerinin Chelonus oculator Panzer (Hymenoptera: Braconidae)'un ergin yaşam süresine etkileri. Türkiye 5. Biyolojik Mücadele Kongresi, 4–7 Eylül 2002, Erzurum, s 127–135.Google Scholar
Tunca, H., Colombel, E.A., Sousan, B.T., Buradino, M., Galio, F. & Tabone, E. (2015) Optimal biological parameters for rearing Ooencyrtus pityocampae on the new laboratory host Philosamia ricini. Journal of Applied Entomology 140 (7), 527535.Google Scholar
Ueno, T. (2005) Effect of host age and size on offspring sex ratio in the pupal parasitoid Pimpla (=Coccygomimus) luctuosa (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture Kyushu University 50, 399405.Google Scholar
Ueno, T. & Ueno, K. (2007) The effects of host-feeding on synovigenic egg development in an endoparasitic wasp, Itoplectis naranyae. Journal of Insect Science 7, 113.Google Scholar
Vinson, S.B. (1985) The behavior of parasitoids. vol. 9, pp. 417469 in Kerkut, G. A. & Gilbert, L. I. (Eds) Comprehensive Insect Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology. Oxford, Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Vinson, S.B. (1998) The general host selection behavior of parasitoid Hymenoptera and a comparison of initial strategies utilized by larvaphagous and oophagous species. Biological Control 11, 7996.Google Scholar
Vinson, S.B. & Iwantsch, G.F. (1980) Host suitability for insect parasitoids. Annual Review of Entomology 25, 397419.Google Scholar
Wang, J.J., Liu, X.B., Zhang, Y.A., Wen, C. & Wei, J.R. (2013) The reproductive capability of Ooencyrtus kuvanae reared on eggs of the factitious host Antheraea pernyi. Journal of Applied Entomology 138, 267272.Google Scholar
Wang, X.G. & Liu, S.S. (2002) Effects of Host Age On the performance of Diadromus collaris, a pupal parasitoid of Plutella xylostella. Biocontrol 47, 293307.Google Scholar
Wylie, H.G. (1964) Effect of host age on rate of development time of Nasonia vitripennis (Walk) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Canadian Entomologist 96 (7), 10231027.Google Scholar
Yang, Z.Q., Achterberg, C.V., Choi, W.Y. & Marsh, P.M. (2005) First recorded parasitoid from China of Agrilus planipennis: a new species of Spathius (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Doryctinae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 98, 636642.Google Scholar
Zar, J.H. (1999) Biostatistical Analysis. 4th edn. Upper Sadle River, New Jersey, USA, Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Zhao, H.Y., Zeng, L., Xu, Y.J., Lu, Y.Y., & Liang, G.W. (2013) Effects of host Age on the Parasitism of Pachycrepoideus vindemmiae (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae), an Ectoparasitic Pupal Parasitoid of Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Florida Entomologist 96 (2), 451457.Google Scholar
Zhou, Y., Abram, P., Boivin, G. & Brodeur, J. (2014) Increasing host age does not have the expected negative effects on the fitness parameters of an egg parasitoid. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 151 (2), 106111.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Daily offspring number (mean ± SE) of Ooencyrthus kuvanae over the lifetime.

Figure 1

Table 1. Results of a GLM analysis of the offspring production ratio of Ooencyrtus kuvanae.

Figure 2

Table 2. Effects of parasitoid age and host number on the offspring production ratio of Ooencyrtus kuvanae (mean ± standard error).

Figure 3

Table 3. Results of a GLM analysis of the development time of Ooencyrus kuvanae.

Figure 4

Table 4. Variation in development time (mean ± standard error) of Ooencyrtus kuvanae with parasitoid age, host number, and host age.