A galling aphid with extra life‐cycle complexity: Population ecology and evolutionary considerations

Wool, David; Burstein, M

doi:10.1007/bf02513556

Cited by 35 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…is very different from that of the other two aphid species: each clone occupies one gall on the tree. In contrast, F. riccobonii and S. betae produce two different galls on the tree host, within 2-3 weeks of each other (Wool and Burstein 1991). The first gall type is established by the fundatrix, while the second type is induced by the nymphs of her first brood.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Impact of a gall-inducing aphid on Pistacia atlantica Desf. trees

Martinez

2008

Arthropod-Plant Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of gall-inducing aphids on shoot development was analyzed in 900 shoots from 20 pistachio trees, Pistacia atlantica Desf. (Anacardiaceae): 600 in which the axillary-lateral buds were galled by Slavum wertheimae HRL during the previous growth season, and 300 ungalled shoots. Although P. atlantica is a compensating tree, and the aphids do not attack the apical buds, further development of shoots from the apical buds was stopped in 62% of the galled shoots, while only 8.7% of nongalled shoots stopped their growth. Further development was stopped more often on shoots carrying two or more galls than on shoots supporting only one gall. To assess the hypothesis that bud destruction by the aphids explains this pattern, a field experiment was conducted in 140 shoots, distributed across seven trees. One, two or three axillary buds from five shoots of each tree were removed for each treatment, and five other shoots were marked as controls. Only 14 shoots (10%) of the 140 did not develop. The growth of the other shoots was not very different among the treatments. The colonization of the apical shoots, which developed on previously treated shoots, by three other galling aphid species was monitored. Removing lateral buds considerably reduced the establishment of Geoica sp. galls (70% of them colonized control shoots), but weakly influenced Forda riccobonii (Stefani). It also contributed only 5% of the total variance of the distribution of Smynthurodes betae West. The different results of the survey and the experiment show that the impact of S. wertheimae galls on the future growth of shoots from apical buds is more complex than the simple physical destruction of the axillary buds.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Impact of a gall-inducing aphid on Pistacia atlantica Desf. trees

Martinez

2008

Arthropod-Plant Interactions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some researchers suggest that there is no relationship between these variables, and that Þnal gall size is determined when the gall is induced (Wool and Manheim 1986, Wool and Burstein 1991, Wool and Bar-El 1995. By contrast, David and Ofra (1998) suggested that gall size is positively correlated with the number of aphids inside the gall; that is, large colonies live in large galls and vice versa.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Gall Development and Clone Dynamics of the Galling Aphid <I>Schlechtendalia chinensis</I> (Hemiptera: Pemphigidae)

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aphid Schlechtendalia chinensis (Bell) induces galls on its primary host, Rhus chinensis Mill. We studied temporal changes in gall and aphid clonal population size throughout the period of gall development. Gall-size changes occurred in four stages: a first slow growth period, a fast growth period, a second slow growth period, and a growth reduction period. Gall volume and surface area increased abruptly toward the end of July, peaking during October, in parallel with an increase in aphid clonal population size, from one individual to > 10,000 aphids per gall. Clear changes were seen in the clone dynamics of S. chinensis. Fundatrix began to produce first-generation apterous fundatrigenia during late May to early June. Second-generation apterous fundatrigenia appeared at the start of July. Alate fundatrigeniae with wing pads first appeared at the end of August, but accounted for < 1% of the individuals in the galls. Adult alate fundatrigeniae first appeared at the start of October. Abrupt changes in aphid density and crowding might trigger the induction of alate morphs in the galls. Of the eight gall properties that we recorded, gall volume was the most accurate measure of gall fitness.

show abstract

“…Several previous studies of the in¯uence of natural enemies on aphid populations tested halfcages or open bags to determine whether these eects could be distinguished, but instead found intermediate responses between those of fully enclosed and exposed aphid populations (Campbell and Cone 1994;Chambers et al 1983;Morris 1992). In other aphid species, only the foundress generation may form galls or pseudogalls on host plants (Wool and Burstein 1991); therefore, the costs of dispersal to new leaves by the parthenogenetic generations may be very high. Way and Banks (1968) observed very little dispersal from initially colonised E. europaeus leaves in spring.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The consequences of clustering by Aphis fabae foundresses on spring migrant production

Hodgson

Godfray

1999

Oecologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aphis fabae (Homoptera: Aphididae) foundresses were shown to have a clustered distribution on leaves of their primary host, Euonymus europaeus. Two field experiments were carried out to determine the costs or benefits of this clustering behaviour to aphid clones. The first experiment, in spring 1996, excluded predators from colonies formed by single fundatrices or clusters of three. No density-dependent effects on colony growth were observed early in the season, but the total production of migrants per foundress was significantly lower for clustered foundresses. This demonstrated that there was no synergistic effect of group feeding on clonal performance. All colonies were initiated on randomly selected leaves and all grew successfully, therefore clustering was not due to a shortage of feeding sites. The second experiment, in spring 1997, tested whether natural enemies cause selection for selfish herding by the foundress generation. Colonies were initiated by one or three foundresses, but half were left unbagged. If natural enemy attack is a selective force inducing clustering behaviour in foundresses, the costs of clustering should have been reduced or negated in unbagged colonies. Colonies grown from clusters produced significantly fewer migrants per foundress, irrespective of bagging treatment. Other potential factors causing clustering behaviour are discussed.

show abstract

A galling aphid with extra life‐cycle complexity: Population ecology and evolutionary considerations

Cited by 35 publications

References 37 publications

Impact of a gall-inducing aphid on Pistacia atlantica Desf. trees

Impact of a gall-inducing aphid on Pistacia atlantica Desf. trees

Gall Development and Clone Dynamics of the Galling Aphid <I>Schlechtendalia chinensis</I> (Hemiptera: Pemphigidae)

The consequences of clustering by Aphis fabae foundresses on spring migrant production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About