2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.aspen.2010.07.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Visual and olfactory preference of Harmonia axyridis (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) adults to various companion plants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…axyridis adults, particularly females, strongly preferred yellow paper pillars over green ones. This has recently been confi rmed by Adedipe and Park (2010) . No female visited the green pillars (Mondor & Warren 2000 ).…”
Section: Sensory R Eceptorsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…axyridis adults, particularly females, strongly preferred yellow paper pillars over green ones. This has recently been confi rmed by Adedipe and Park (2010) . No female visited the green pillars (Mondor & Warren 2000 ).…”
Section: Sensory R Eceptorsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Our results support earlier literature that H. axyridis prefers to the olfactory cues of other plant flowers, such as sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) (Dufour 2000). Adedipe and Park (2010) found that H. axyridis adults significantly preferred sunflower and dill (Anethum graveolens L.) among 10 potential companion plants tested in an olfactory preference test. Jones and Gillett (2005) found that sunflower and nearby crop vegetation (within 1 m of sunflower) also attracted other arthropod predators, parasitic wasps, and some important pollinators.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…These effects have largely been extrapolated from empirical experiments using companion plant extracts or essential oils (Hori, ; Pavela, ; Halbert et al ., ) but scarcely using living plants. In addition to volatile emission under natural conditions, the presence of external and physical interactions, such as natural enemies (Landis et al ., ; Adedipe & Park, ; Biondi et al ., ) and root interactions (Collier & Finch, ; Glinwood et al ., ), respectively, could distort the interpretation of results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%