The feeding activity of Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) on Barathra brassicae L. and Spodoptera littoralis (Boisd.)¹

Abstract

In the present study the feeding activity of Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) on eggs of the two lepidopterous species, Barathra brassicae L. and Spodoptera littoralis (Boisd.) was investigated. In both cases the number of eggs killed by C. carnea increased slowly and reached a peak in the third larval stage. By third stage larvae 367.7 eggs of B. brassicae, which is equivalent to 86.23% of the total amount, and 837.4 or 85.20% of S. littoralis eggs were killed. During larval development C. carnea consumed a mean total of 426.2 B. brassicae eggs compared to 982.9 S. littoralis eggs. The weight determination of the lepidopterous eggs revealed, that the eggs of B. brassicae had a weight of 101.1 mg per 1000 eggs and so were 2.33 times heavier than S. littoralis eggs which had a weight of 45.3 mg per 1000 eggs. Thus C. carnea larvae consumed 43.12 mg of B. brassicae and 44.54 mg of S. littoralis eggs. This indicated that C. carnea did kill a different number of eggs of the two lepidopterous species, the weight of the prey consumed however was the same. Zusammenfassung Fraßaktivität von Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) gegenüber Kohleule, Barathra brassicae L. und Baumwolleule, Spodoptera littoralis (Boisd.) In der vorliegenden Arbeit wurde Chrysoperla carnea auf die Fraßaktivität gegenüber den beiden Lepidopteren‐Arten Barathra brassicae und Spodoptera littoralis untersucht. Bei beiden Arten stieg der Eiverzehr allmählich an und erreichte im dritten Larvenstadium ein Maximum. So wurden von B. brassicae in diesem Stadium durchschnittlich 367,7 Eier, was 86,23 % der Gesamtmenge entsprach, von S. littoralis 837,4 Eier oder 85,20 % gefressen. C. carnea vertilgte während der gesamten Larvenentwicklung 426,2 Eier von B. brassicae gegenüber 982,9 Eier von S. littoralis. Das Wiegen der Eier beider Lepidopteren‐Arten ergab, daß die Eier von B. brassicae mit einem Gewicht von 101,1 mg pro 1000 Eier 2,33mal schwerer waren als die Eier von S. littoralis mit einem Gewicht von 45,3 mg pro 1000 Eier. Somit verzehrte C. carnea 43,12 mg Eier von B. brassicae bzw. 44,54 mg Eier von S. littoralis. Hieraus wurde ersichtlich, daß C. carnea zwar eine unterschiedliche Anzahl Eier von beiden Lepidopteren‐Arten verzehrte, gewichtsmäßig blieb die Menge jedoch gleich.

Predation capacity and prey preference of Chrysoperla carnea on Pieris brassicae

“…In a field cage study examining biological control of Heliothis zea (Boddie) and H. virescens (Fabricius) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Ridgway and Jones (1968) found indications that inundative releases of C. carnea offered considerable potential in cotton. Supportive evidence of the potential of C. carnea against lepidopteran pests comes from observations that this species could complete juvenile development when feeding on eggs of Mamestra brassicae (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) or of Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) (Ş engonca and Grooterhorst 1985). Similarly, Klingen et al (1996) found that most C. carnea in their experiments could develop to adulthood by feeding on eggs or larvae of M. brassicae.…”

Effects of Bio-Pesticides on Biology of Chrysoperla carnea F. (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae)

“…Emergence of adults occur in 8-10 days. There may be two to several generations per year [4][5][6][7].…”

SURVEY THE NEUROPTEROUS PREDATORS AND THE RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF Chrysoperla carnea (STEPH.) AND Chrysopa septempunctata WESM. BY USING A LIGHT TRAP AT MANSOURA DISTRICT

“…They feed on fluid materials and various soft-bodied insects. Many species of order group are known as very effective predaceous insects for more than 80 species of insect pests and ten species of mites (Butler and Ritchie , 1978 ;Kharizanov and Babrikova , 1978 ;Kharizanov , 1982;Sengonca and Grooterhorst , 1985;Ghanim et al, 1988 andAbd El-Aziz , 1991). Several investigators had studied the flight activity and population density of certain neuropterous predatory insect species by using the light traps ( Hassanein , 1956 ;Honek , 1977;Nielsen , 1977;Tadic , 1979 ;Stang, 1980;Honek and Kraus 1981;Abd El-Aziz,1991;Gunther, 1991;Szenthiralyi et al 2001;Soliman, 2004;Deutsch et al 2005. andJeyakumare et al 2007).…”