ASSOCIATIVE LEARNING BY <i>NEMERITIS CANESCENS</i> (HYMENOPTERA: ICHNEUMONIDAE)

Arthur, A. P.

doi:10.4039/ent1031137-8

Cited by 60 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Townes (1962) pointed out that the pattern of search does not by itself determine host specificity. Taylor (1974) thus suggested that the proportion of host specificity under genetic control must reside in host acceptance The challenge to the supposition that host searching is under genetic control is brought out by the well documented phenomenon of learning in insects (Alloway 1972) and in the case of insect parasitoids, the work of Thorpe (1938Thorpe ( , 1943, Arthur (1966Arthur ( , 1971, Taylor (1974) and Gross et al (1975). Arthur (1966), working with a non-host specific parasitoid, I. conquisitor, reported that the female learns to concentrate her search to productive habitats.…”

Section: Parasitoid Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Arthur (1966), working with a non-host specific parasitoid, I. conquisitor, reported that the female learns to concentrate her search to productive habitats. In a later paper (Arthur 1971) using a host-specific parasitoid, V. canescens, showed that the female could be conditioned to associate a "normal" odor with the presence of hosts. Taylor (1974) expanded on the above studies using V. canescens and showed that the female can learn to hunt hosts in a novel environment and that a model using the learning of two cues fits better than a model using only one.…”

Section: Parasitoid Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biochemical Coevolution between Parasitoids and their Hosts

Vinson

1975

Evolutionary Strategies of Parasitic Insects and Mites

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The coevolution of a predator and its prey suggests that the prey is selected for predator avoidance and escape while the predator is selected for more efficient prey-finding and capture. The predator attacks and consumes its host and, thus being successful, would be expected to propagate. The parasite-host relationship is a similar reciprocating evolutionary relationship with one important difference--the host should not be killed. The parasite must not only locate the host but must constantly adapt to a developing and changing host, a situation resulting in a closely interwoven relationship. The continued development of a host in accord with the evolutionary development of the host species is of benefit to the parasite. It is probably advantageous for the parasite to evolve towards a condition where the parasite has a minimal affect on the host species. This would insure the continued existence of a viable host population.The parasitoid-host relationship is akin to the predator-and parasite-host relationship, but with some unique aspects. The term parasitoid is used for arthropods where the egg and early larval stages are parasitic, but where the host is eventually killed. The adult is free living. In the parasitoid-host relationship, the parasitoid must not only locate the host, but must utilize the host for the progeny's benefit. Once the host has been parasitized, the parasitoid's progeny grow and develop at the expense of the host; ultimately killing the host. The host's future development is only of importance to the parasitoid. Thus the evolutionary strategy of the parasitoid is different from that of a parasite or predator. The parasitized host can no longer be considered as a member of the host species, but must be viewed as a container for the parasitoid. The evolutionary development of the parasitized host towards a

show abstract

Section: Parasitoid Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Parasitoid Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biochemical Coevolution between Parasitoids and their Hosts

Vinson

1975

Evolutionary Strategies of Parasitic Insects and Mites

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For clarity I use the terms oligophagous and polyphagous to describe herbivore diet breadth. Diet specialization is relative and may be affected by local ecological conditions (Fox & Morrow 1981), population density (Zwolfer 1971), or even individual experience (Arthur 1971, Vet 1983). Despite such difficulties, the concept of diet specialization is heuristic.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Response by Specialist and Generalist Natural Enemies to Agroecosystem Diversification: A Selective Review

Sheehan¹

1986

Environmental Entomology

179

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The second step in the host finding process is host location and involves close range cues (Lewis & Jones, 1971 ;Jones et al, 1971 ;Sauls et al, 1979 ;Nordlund & Sauls, 1981). Additionally, parasitoid learning may play a role in the host finding process (Arthur, 1966(Arthur, , 1971Drost et al, 1988, Kaas, 1990. Host derived products have been demonstrated to influence parasitoid behavior (Whitman, 1988).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral time budget and periodicity exhibited byMicroplitis croceipes in field cages withHeliothis virescens on spring host plants

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microplitis croceipes (Cresson) females were observed between 06:00 and 20:00 hours in cages containing spring host plants infested with Heliothis virescens (F.), tobacco budworm, larvae. Cages contained Geranium dissectum L. and Trifolium incarnatum L. in plantings of equal area, each infested with 50 H. virescens larvae. A time budget for the various behaviors exhibited by the wasps was obtained. In order of decreasing time spent, M. croceipes females were observed to exhibit standing still, searching on plant surface, preening, oriented flight, general flight, and walking. The proportion of time spent preening increased over the day. Oriented flight, general flight, searching, and walking peaked in the morning between 09:00 and 12:00 hours. Oriented flight, general flight, and walking showed minor increases in the afternoon. Microplitis croceipes females spent significantly more time preening, orienting to, and walking and searching on clover than on geranium. However, there was no difference in time spent standing still on geranium or clover. Significance of these findings for development of effective augmentative release strategies is discussed. KEY-WORDS : behavior, time budget, field cage.Parasitoid foraging is widely studied (see Hassell & Waage, 1984 ;Van Alphen & Vet, 1986 for reviews) because of the importance of parasitoid searching success and fitness to their practical application in biological control of pest insects. Most studies, however, are conducted under laboratory conditions and, thus, do not provide a reliable indication of wasp behavior under field conditions. The labor intensive nature of behavioral observations and the small size and high mobility of parasitoids make it difficult to observe active parasitoids for extended periods under field situations (Casas, 1989). However, use of field cages erected over natural vegetation allows observation of parasitoids under conditions similar to field environments. Direct observation of parasitoid behavior provides insight into the processes that lead to parasitization rates usually observed in the field. In contrast, measuring field parasitization rates is an indirect way of studying parasitoid behavior.(l)

show abstract

ASSOCIATIVE LEARNING BY NEMERITIS CANESCENS (HYMENOPTERA: ICHNEUMONIDAE)

Cited by 60 publications

References 5 publications

Biochemical Coevolution between Parasitoids and their Hosts

Biochemical Coevolution between Parasitoids and their Hosts

Response by Specialist and Generalist Natural Enemies to Agroecosystem Diversification: A Selective Review

Behavioral time budget and periodicity exhibited byMicroplitis croceipes in field cages withHeliothis virescens on spring host plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About