Venoms of Sphecidae, Pompilidae, Mutillidae, and Bethylidae

Rathmayer, W.

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-45501-8_22

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is most likely that during the stinging process these mechanoreceptors signal the gaster tip's touch of the prey larva and the extent of the stings' protrusion is thereby regulated. Many of the nonsocial aculeate Hymenoptera, which paralyze prey by stinging, are equipped with mechanoreceptors on the tip of the sting sheath (Oeser 1961, Rathmayer 1962, 1978 (1958,1971) and Brown (1975) suggested that nomadism in the ant-preying cerapachyine species could well be adaptive to avoid depleting the food supply in a given neighborhood, just as it is in the army ants. This assumption of a nomadic life style is further supported by Brown's observations that the nests of many cerapachyine species appear to be impermanent, and that the "brood show a strong tendency to be synchronized, like those of army ants and nomadic Ponerinae".…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication, Raiding Behavior and Prey Storage in Cerapachys (Hymenoptera; Formicidae)

Hölldobler

1982

Psyche: A Journal of Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication, Raiding Behavior and Prey Storage in Cerapachys (Hymenoptera; Formicidae)

Hölldobler

1982

Psyche: A Journal of Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Venoms contain various toxins, which affect mostly the ability of the prey's nervous system to generate muscle contractions resulting in an immobilization of the prey. Within the large group of venomous wasps, a few species do not paralyze but manipulate the behavior of their victims in the most interesting ways (Rathmayer, 1978;Steiner, 1986;Piek, 1990). The parasitoid solitary wasp Ampulex compressa hunts cockroaches (Periplaneta americana) and attacks them by stinging them first in the thorax and then in the head (Williams, 1942;Piek et al, 1984;Fouad et al, 1994) [ Fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Direct injection of venom by a predatory wasp into cockroach brain

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we provide direct evidence for injection of venom by a wasp into the central nervous system of its cockroach prey. Venomous predators use neurotoxins that generally act at the neuromuscular junction, resulting in different types of prey paralysis. The sting of the parasitoid wasp Ampulex compressa is unusual, as it induces grooming behavior, followed by a long-term lethargic state of its insect prey, thus ultimately providing a living meal for the newborn wasp larvae. These behavioral modifications are induced only when a sting is inflicted into the head. These unique effects of the wasp venom on prey behavior suggest that the venom targets the insect's central nervous system. The mechanism by which behavior modifying compounds in the venom transverse the blood-brain barrier to induce these central and long-lasting effects has been the subject of debate. In this article, we demonstrate that the wasp stings directly into the target ganglia in the head of its prey. To prove this assertion, we produced "hot" wasps by injecting them with (14)C radiolabeled amino acids and used a combination of liquid scintillation and light microscopy autoradiography to trace radiolabeled venom in the prey. To our knowledge, this is the first direct evidence documenting targeted delivery of venom by a predator into the brain of its prey.

show abstract

“…Either they inject their venom into the hemolymph, where it diffuses and acts at the neuromuscular junctions, or they sting in the direction of the central nervous system (CNS), causing paralysis that is often followed by a change in the prey's behavior (Beard, 1952;Steiner, 1962;Piek et al, 1984Piek et al, , 1989Gnatzy et al, 1992;Gnatzy and Otto, 1996;Fouad et al, 1994Fouad et al, , 1996; for reviews, see Rathmayer, 1978;Piek, 1986;Steiner, 1986).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%