Effects of prey species and its density on larval performance of two species of hoverfly larvae, Episyrphus balteatus de Geer and Eupeodes corollae Fabricius (Diptera: Syrphidae)

Abstract

Functional response and effects of prey species, Acyrtosiphon pisum (Harris) and Aphis craccivora Koch, and its density on larval performance such as survival rate and development time in addition to adult weight gain of the two predatory hoverflies, Episyrphus balteatus de Geer and Eupeodes corollae Fabricius, were examined in the laboratory. Our study revealed that prey density positively influences larval performance and the adult weight of the two hoverfly species. However, the effects of prey species on survival rate and development time differed: A. pisum was better food for E. balteatus, while the larval performance of E. corollae was enhanced by A. craccivora. In addition, the effect of prey density differed with development stage, since voracity increased with larval development. Both hoverfly species tended to eat a larger number of preys with lower quality, which in turn resulted in lower performance. The functional response differed between species involved and among development stages. During the third-instar stage, both species showed linear relationships as a functional response, while Holling's Type II response was observed during the young instar phase. E. balteatus tended to have linear relationships than E. corollae, and this would be caused by the larger size of E. balteatus, which in turn consumed more aphids than did E. corollae. This study suggests that the differences in the effects of prey species and its density on the larval performance of the two hoverflies are attributable to the differences in the range of food habit and body size.Key words: Episyrphus balteatus; Eupeodes corollae; functional response; prey density; prey species * To whom correspondence should be addressed at: E-mail: nsputra@faperta.ugm.ac.id DOI: 10.1303DOI: 10. /aez.2006 predators (Rotheray, 1989). We know that these predators play an important role in the suppression of aphid abundance (Dixon, 1970;Wratten, 1973;Chambers and Adams, 1986;Lucas et al., 1997;Zhang and Hassan, 2003;Lee and Kang, 2004). However, most studies have focused on the impact of ladybirds over aphids, and few experimental studies have been completed on other aphid predators.The hoverfly in addition to ladybirds has been nominated as a candidate for controlling the aphid population, since it is a voracious species (Gilbert, 1993;Tenhumberg, 1995), and the adults tend to lay eggs at an earlier developmental phase of aphid colonies (Kan and Sasakawa, 1986; Kan, 1988a, b), suggesting their ability to reduce aphid abundance. In order to use predatory hoverflies as a candidate for biological control agent to reduce aphid abundance, more information is required in terms of functional response in addition to the effects of prey quality and quantity on larval performance. Since hoverfly larvae are slow-moving predators, prey availability in a given area on a plant might become an important factor to influence larval performance. In addition, Sadeghi and Gilbert (2000) suggested that prey quality affects the larval performance of hoverflies. ...

Life table and predation rates of the syrphid fly Allograpta exotica, a control agent of the cowpea aphid Aphis craccivora

“…For instance, functional response type II has been reported for E. balteatus and Scaeva albomaculata (Macquart, 1842) feeding on Myzus persicae (Sulzer, 1776) (Jalilian et al, 2011), for E. balteatus upon Aphis fabae Scopoli, (Torrealba and Arcaya, 2014). Type II functional response is also detected by Khan et al (2016) for Sphaerophoria scripta (Linnaeus, 1758) and E. balteatus upon Aphis pomi (de Geer, 1773 (Singh and Mishra, 1988;Putra and Yasuda, 2006;Jalilian et al, 2011;Sobhani et al, 2013). More detailed studies considering different preys, precise statistical analyses and the effect in the different larval instars are required to know the specific details of the functional response of predatory syrphid larvae.…”

“…Effects of prey density frequently vary with developmental stage since voracity increases with larval development (Barlow and Whittingham, 1986;Omkar and James, 2004;Putra and Yasuda, 2006;Mushtaq et al, 2014). In the present study, all larval instars of A. exotica had a high predation on third and fourth instar nymphs of A. craccivora, with the third instar larva being the most voracious.…”

“…Tenhumberg, 1995;Putra and Yasuda, 2006;Jalilian et al, 2011;Sobhani et al, 2013;Amiri-Jami and Sadegui-Namaghi, 2014). In the Neotropical Region where E. balteatus is absent, only the functional response of Pseudodoros clavatus (Fabricius, 1794) has been studied (Torrealba and Arcaya, 2014).…”

Oviposition preference of two hoverfly species in response to risk of intraguild predation

“…S. posticalis is the smallest and least mobile and P. japonica is intermediate in body size and mobility. The hoverflies, E. balteatus and M. corollae, are different in body size (Putra and Yasuda, 2006), but both are polyphagous species (Owen and Gilbert, 1989;Gilbert and Owen, 1990), although E. balteatus seems to have wider range of prey species.…”

Predatory Insect Species Associated With Some Rosaceous Plants in Edi̇rne (Trakya University Arboretum), Turkey

“…Because of the effective predatory feature of their larvae, these species are important in biocontrol of aphids (Zeki and Kılınçer 1990, Cowgill et al 1993, Putra and Yasuda 2006 (Dyer 1995, Amiri-Jami et al 2015. According to a study carried out by Vanhaelen et al (2002), specialist aphids feed on their preferred plant if it is rich in its specific metabolites.…”