Effect of presence and semiochemicals of conspecific stages on oviposition by ladybirds (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae)

Abstract

Abstract.Reduced oviposition by ladybirds in the presence of tracks of fourth instar larvae owing to the presence of oviposition deterring pheromones is well established across many genera. However, deterrence, if any, by other life stages has not been well investigated, in particular the effect of conspecific presence. The present study investigates the effects of conspecific presence and semiochemicals of conspecific life stages (eggs, fourth instar larvae, pupae, adult males and females) on oviposition by five ladybird (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) species, viz. Coccinella septempunctata, Coccinella transversalis, Cheilomenes sexmaculata, Propylea dissecta and Anegleis cardoni. Results reveal that the presence of life stages inhibits oviposition and the inhibition is densitydependent, although the degree of inhibition is species-specific. Surface semiochemicals of eggs and larval and adult tracks also show density-dependent inhibitory effects. Moreover, the semiochemicals in tracks (oviposition deterring pheromones) and egg surface semiochemicals are not similar, indicating semiochemical parsimony. Of all species tested, C. transversalis and C. septempunctata were the most and the least responsive to both conspecific presence and semiochemicals, respectively.

Larval and female footprints as feeding deterrent cues for immature stages of two congeneric ladybird predators (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae)

“…Detection and avoidance of chemical tracks resulting in reduced or no foraging has been demonstrated earlier by the larvae of Hippodamia convergens Guerin-Meneville by Rutledge et al (2008), Cycloneda limbifer Say by Ruzicka & Zemek (2008), and H. axyridis by Moser et al (2010). Apart from the foraging, the oviposition-deterring response of female ladybirds to larval/adult tracks (both conspecific and heterospecific) also were reported (Hemptinne et al, 1992;Ruzicka, 1997Ruzicka, , 2003Ruzicka, , 2006Ruzicka, , 2010Michaud & Jyoti, 2007;Ruzicka & Zemek, 2008;Mishra et al, 2012a).…”

“…The semiochemical tracks left by ladybirds during foraging (Hemptinne et al, 1992;Doumbia et al, 1998;Nakashima et al, 2004) also serve several other functions, such as: (i) a means of avoiding cannibalism and competition with other aphidophagous ladybirds (Hemptinne & Dixon, 2000;Kajita et al, 2006;Ruzicka & Zemek, 2008;Magro et al, 2010), (ii) reduce overexploitation of a food resource limited in time and space (Nufio & Papaj, 2001), and (iii) signals for other species to prevent intra-guild competition (Nakashima & Senoo, 2003;Nakashima et al, 2006;Meisner et al, 2011). Thus, besides oviposition-deterring pheromones (Ruzicka, 2003(Ruzicka, , 2006Michaud & Jyoti, 2007;Ruzicka & Zemek, 2008;Mishra et al, 2012a) these semiochemicals, although not experimentally proved earlier, may also behave as foraging deterrent pheromones (FDPs).…”

“…Numerous studies are present in the literature on semiochemical tracks of both larvae and adults, but these were conducted only to evaluate oviposition deterrence by either (i) egg surface semiochemicals (Mishra et al, 2012a(Mishra et al, , 2013, (ii) conspecific and/or heterospecific larval (Hemptinne et al, 1992;Ruzicka, 1997Ruzicka, , 2003Ruzicka, , 2006Michaud & Jyoti, 2007;Ruzicka & Zemek, 2008;Mishra et al, 2012a) and/or adult tracks (Mishra & Omkar, 2006;Mishra et al, 2012a), or (iii) conspecific related (sibling) and unrelated (non-sibling) larval tracks (Martini et al, 2009(Martini et al, , 2013. However, there are very few studies on the effect of conspecific and/or heterospecific larval and adult female tracks on predation parameters of immature stages of ladybirds, in terms of (i) consumption rate, (ii) conversion efficiency, (iii) growth rate, and (iv) developmental duration.…”

Foraging behaviour of predaceous ladybird beetles: a review

“…Adults and larvae of ladybirds leave trails or footprints (Mishra et al 2012;Kumar et al 2014a) in the form of non-volatile hydrocarbons (Magro et al 2007), which deter other foraging ladybirds. These chemicals may be referred to as deterrent pheromones as they inhibit foraging activity (Ruzicka and Zemek 2008;Moser et al 2010).…”

Does the Volatile Hydrocarbon Profile Differ Between the Sexes: A Case Study on Five Aphidophagous Ladybirds

“…In ladybirds (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), HCs have been found in volatiles (Al‐Abassi et al., ; Hemptinne et al., ), footprints (Kosaki and Yamaoka, ; Magro et al., , ), and cuticular lipids (Durieux et al., ). Most work has concentrated on the HC footprints of larvae as well as adults that are responsible for oviposition deterrence (oviposition deterring pheromone, ODP; Ruzicka, , , , , , ; Ruzicka and Zemek, ; Mishra et al., , ). These signature footprints are known to differ with species while being more similar in taxonomically close species (Magro et al., ).…”