Thysanoptera-Terebrantia of the Hawaiian Islands: an identification manual

Mound, Laurence A.; Nakahara, S.; Tsuda, Dick M.

doi:10.3897/zookeys.549.6889

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recognition of this species is a high priority for quarantine entomologists, and the most closely similar species within Frankliniella seem to be crotalariae, intonsa, insularis and panamensis. The first of these is a pure yellow species that is probably host specific to the flowers of Crotalaria species, and although it is introduced to Hawaii (Mound et al 2016) it has not been reported in the world trade in horticultural products. The second species, intonsa, is widespread across the Northern hemisphere, and is commonly taken in quarantine.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving the confused identity of Frankliniella panamensis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Gunawardana

Masumoto³

et al. 2017

Zootaxa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving the confused identity of Frankliniella panamensis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Gunawardana

Masumoto³

et al. 2017

Zootaxa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The species status of G. ficorum remains uncertain for many years. Mound et al (2016) have suggested that G. ficorum is probably a form of G. uzeli , and morphological differences between different populations of these thrips can be due to different hosts and latitude. According to Brito et al (2010) , differences in chromosome number between G. uzeli (the cytotype A with n=13) and G. ficorum (n=15) as well as differences in chromosome morphology between G. uzeli (the cytotype B with n=4M+10SM+1A) and G. ficorum (n=4M+7SM+6T) indicate that both G. uzeli and G. ficorum are distinct species and that pericentric inversions led to the differentiation of their karyotypes.…”

Section: Review and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of chromosome numbers and sex chromosome systems in Paraneoptera (Insecta)

Kuznetsova¹,

Gavrilov-Zimin²,

Grozeva³

et al. 2021

CCG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is part (the 4th article) of the themed issue (a monograph) “Aberrant cytogenetic and reproductive patterns in the evolution of Paraneoptera”. The purpose of this article is to consider chromosome structure and evolution, chromosome numbers and sex chromosome systems, which all together constitute the chromosomal basis of reproduction and are essential for reproductive success. We are based on our own observations and literature data available for all major lineages of Paraneoptera including Zoraptera (angel insects), Copeognatha (=Psocoptera; bark lice), Parasita (=Phthiraptera s. str; true lice), Thysanoptera (thrips), Homoptera (scale insects, aphids, jumping plant-lice, whiteflies, and true hoppers), Heteroptera (true bugs), and Coleorrhyncha (moss bugs). Terminology, nomenclature, classification, and the study methods are given in the first paper of the issue (Gavrilov-Zimin et al. 2021).

show abstract

“…Conventional insect taxonomy mostly relies on external morphology-based dichotomous keys for species delimitation. Several such resources are available for the identification of thrips specimens [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ]. However, species identification based on morphological characters is time-consuming as it involves processing of specimens, preparation of microscope slides, and magnification using a microscope, as well as expert morphological knowledge of the genera.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frontiers Approaches to the Diagnosis of Thrips (Thysanoptera): How Effective Are the Molecular and Electronic Detection Platforms?

Ghosh

Jangra

Dietzgen

et al. 2021

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thrips are insect pests of economically important agricultural, horticultural, and forest crops. They cause damage by sucking plant sap and by transmitting several tospoviruses, ilarviruses, carmoviruses, sobemoviruses, and machlomoviruses. Accurate and timely identification is the key to successful management of thrips species. However, their small size, cryptic nature, presence of color and reproductive morphs, and intraspecies genetic variability make the identification of thrips species challenging. The use of molecular and electronic detection platforms has made thrips identification rapid, precise, sensitive, high throughput, and independent of developmental stages. Multi-locus phylogeny based on mitochondrial, nuclear, and other markers has resolved ambiguities in morphologically indistinguishable thrips species. Microsatellite, RFLP, RAPD, AFLP, and CAPS markers have helped to explain population structure, gene flow, and intraspecies heterogeneity. Recent techniques such as LAMP and RPA have been employed for sensitive and on-site identification of thrips. Artificial neural networks and high throughput diagnostics facilitate automated identification. This review also discusses the potential of pyrosequencing, microarrays, high throughput sequencing, and electronic sensors in delimiting thrips species.

show abstract

Thysanoptera-Terebrantia of the Hawaiian Islands: an identification manual

Cited by 12 publications

References 40 publications

Resolving the confused identity of Frankliniella panamensis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Resolving the confused identity of Frankliniella panamensis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Comparative analysis of chromosome numbers and sex chromosome systems in Paraneoptera (Insecta)

Frontiers Approaches to the Diagnosis of Thrips (Thysanoptera): How Effective Are the Molecular and Electronic Detection Platforms?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About